Class/magic feature branch

[PowerWyrm]

- Electric Arc doesn't tell how much damage it does or its range
- Acid Spray doesn't tell how much damage it does
- Tap Magical Energy doesn't restore mana (should probably tell how much mana per charge it restores)
- I may be wrong, but I don't think Mana Channel works as intended (using a bow of ES+1 you can shoot 2 arrows at +0 speed against a +0 speed monster before it acts, but clearly it can act every turn when you cast a spell while FastCast is on)
- Thrust Away doesn't tell how much damage it does

EDIT: my bad... Tap Magical Energy does restore mana, but you need a certain amount of charges to get mana from it (I tried with a staff of summoning with 2 charges and it didn't restore anything, but with a staff of detect invisible with 21 charges it restored roughly 7 mana, so I guess it's number of charges / 3 mana points)

[Derakon]

I would assume that the mana restored depends somehow on the level of the item being tapped.

[Philip]

I disagree to your analysis PowerWyrm.

How is the damage calculation done for each class? "Benchmark" is the warrior class in my eyes with 6 attackes per turn and an estimated damage of 100 per hit making it 600 damage per attack sequence (but which can be exceptional higher with a mace of disruption).

I would define the goal that all classes should deliver around the same maximum damage versus Morgoth, because i cannot see why different classes should deliver different damage in the end fight.

So that makes it:
Mana Storm 500-600 total damage
Greater Mana Bolt 200-250 damage
Mana Bolt 100-120 damage
Fire Bolt 60-70 damage
Frost Bolt 30-40 damage
Magic Missle 10-20 damage

Something like that would be an exponential damage increase, always around x2 better damage.

Edit: I agree that a CL 50 mage with MaxInt should have 0% fail for ManaStorm too! Everything else sucks from player point of view (and would be nothing else than an average damage reduction).

The benchmark should be some form of ranged combat. A warrior pays for significantly higher damage with not being able to apply it as consistently (out of melee range) and taking melee hits in retaliation (without even the benefit of a heal spell). I don't know what the benchmark should be, but as a general rule I would suggest that mages should easily outdamage priests at range, should outdamage devices as used by any class except a mage, and should do somewhat less average damage than the top archery class (or classes, potentially), since magic is more reliable (and technically, regenerates, unlike ammo), For the future, I would imagine a mage would do less damage with spells than a necromancer (who would be sacrificing the control the mage spell set gives you), but more than a druid (maybe the druid could have damage over time effects to make them worthwhile?).

[Tibarius]

[*]New spell in 3rd book, Tap Magical Energy, turns staff and wand charged into mana[*]Detection spell in 4th book[*]Mana Bolt made like PowerWyrm's Lesser Mana Bolt[*]Thrust Away made like PW's Greater Mana Bolt[*]Mana Storm fail rate adjusted[*]New spell in 5th book, Mana Channel, makes spellcasting temporarily twice as fast (like extra shots are done, substitute for haste)[*]Dungeon books start dropping at 30, 40, 60 instead of 30, 50, 70

Cool stuff ... and a very good idea with Mana Channel. I will testplay that later on!

Just that DL 60 as drop start for the last book seems slightly early to me.

The 'old' mage had a 4th meteor as class special. Does the new mage has any class special that will kick in CL dependant (somewhere between 20 and 40)?

[Derakon]

Do also remember that warriors manage maybe an 80% hit rate, and getting to nominal 600 damage/round is the exception, not the norm. I would accept 80% of 500 (that is, 400) damage/round as being a target for damage for characters standing in melee range, and for characters attacking from range to achieve 50-70% of that number (200-280), if they're using "pure" damage that they can sustain basically indefinitely. Expensive and/or gear-dependent abilities would hit harder of course, and for at least some class Morgoth ought to be a victory lap because the real hard part was surviving until the final fight.

[Tibarius]

The benchmark should be some form of ranged combat. A warrior pays for significantly higher damage with not being able to apply it as consistently (out of melee range) and taking melee hits in retaliation (without even the benefit of a heal spell). I don't know what the benchmark should be, but as a general rule I would suggest that mages should easily outdamage priests at range, should outdamage devices as used by any class except a mage, and should do somewhat less average damage than the top archery class (or classes, potentially), since magic is more reliable (and technically, regenerates, unlike ammo), For the future, I would imagine a mage would do less damage with spells than a necromancer (who would be sacrificing the control the mage spell set gives you), but more than a druid (maybe the druid could have damage over time effects to make them worthwhile?).

But haven't warriors about 3x as much max HPs as mages have? I thought that compensates for the drawback to have melee attacks only. So that they can (and must) soak up more damage taken before they can start delivering their own.

[Philip]

Priests should probably do like 200-300 damage in melee, on account of how they have cheap 0% fail healing. In general though, that benchmark ought to hold up quite well, I feel.

Warriors have maybe 1.5x as much HP as mages. Even accounting for how much easier it is for warriors to have max CON, the effects of CON don't care how much HP or hit dice you have, they just give you +hp/level.

[Tibarius]

new mage testplay

Hmm, i don't get realy in touch with the new mage. That is not realy a lack of power. But i am so used to the playstyle with light, stone to mud and haste that i always feel there is something missing.

[Sky]

Mages have between 900 and 1000 hp. Warriors have 1050 to 1150.

[Derakon]

Hmm, i don't get realy in touch with the new mage. That is not realy a lack of power. But i am so used to the playstyle with light, stone to mud and haste that i always feel there is something missing.

That seems to be Nick's goal. To make each magical realm more distinct, they need to have things they can't do. Hopefully each pure caster ends up feeling like they're really good at some things, can do other things decently, and have to rely on devices or do without for everything else.

[Werbaer]

Mages have between 900 and 1000 hp. Warriors have 1050 to 1150.

Is this a 4.1.2 change?
My last mages had 822 and 852 hp. My last warriors had 1075 and 1125 hp.

With max con, warriors have (or had) 225 hp more than mages of the same race. Since mages are usually of the frailer races, the difference is usually ~50 higher. An average lv 50 hobbit mage has 828 hp with max constitution, an average half-troll warrior 1185.

[Estie]

Not having played in a longish time, I dont see the plan yet, either. Having stone to mud in the book or not isnt changing playstyle at all; it just means you have less inventory space. Things that make playstyle differences are banishment or orb of draining - because they are not readily available from device, or not at all.

It needs something like that to give a class the feel of a spellcaster; otherwise, its more like a nuking hybrid - elemental ranger rather than mage.

[Nick]

Things that make playstyle differences are banishment or orb of draining - because they are not readily available from device, or not at all.

That's a good point. Currently two-thirds of the spells in the new mage dungeon books are not available anywhere else.

[PowerWyrm]

Stone to mud is easily fixable: add a "tool" slot for diggers, so you don't have to carry and swap your weapon each time you want to dig a square. Or give more charges to the wands.

[fph]

Reducing the number of books (as is in the plans) also frees up one or two inventory slots.