|
Sarien | Fri 22-Jan-16 08:05 AM |
Member since 14th Feb 2009
740 posts
| |
|
#62399, "reanimate and spellbane"
|
Should reanimate seemingly bypass spellbane? I can't think of any other targeted spells that get a free pass.
|
|
|
|
I'd say so,
incognito,
22-Jan-16 01:08 PM, #13
isn't that an area spell? nt,
Dallevian,
22-Jan-16 01:40 PM, #16
Yes but other area spells,
incognito,
22-Jan-16 03:00 PM, #19
Makes sense to me. (nt),
Umiron,
22-Jan-16 09:06 AM, #1
Clarification?,
Sarien,
22-Jan-16 09:51 AM, #2
I agree,
Bemused,
22-Jan-16 09:52 AM, #3
I am fine with it either way - I just want consistency ...,
Sarien,
22-Jan-16 10:00 AM, #4
Easily,
Kstatida,
22-Jan-16 10:06 AM, #6
You misspelled Sciontific.,
Murphy,
22-Jan-16 10:09 AM, #8
Let's make seaweed off limits to ragers,
incognito,
22-Jan-16 01:10 PM, #14
got to be balanced for non lich/mummy as well,
laxman,
22-Jan-16 01:58 PM, #17
This is true...,
Tac,
22-Jan-16 02:07 PM, #18
They only have to land sleep though,
incognito,
22-Jan-16 03:03 PM, #21
you serious? as a rager with -65svs, reanimate tore th...,
Dallevian,
22-Jan-16 10:00 AM, #5
If you took that much damage...,
laxman,
22-Jan-16 11:55 AM, #10
yes, sigil, first thing lich and mummy always open with,
Dallevian,
22-Jan-16 12:11 PM, #11
I've hit unspeaks with the spell,
incognito,
22-Jan-16 03:01 PM, #20
RE: Clarification?,
Umiron,
22-Jan-16 10:07 AM, #7
CF is like the Bible! nt,
Tac,
22-Jan-16 10:19 AM, #9
Correct me if I'm wrong but before this post it DID byp...,
TJHuron,
22-Jan-16 12:59 PM, #12
Yes. I changed nothing. (nt),
Umiron,
22-Jan-16 01:14 PM, #15
RE: Consistency,
Jormyr,
22-Jan-16 10:11 PM, #22
RE: Consistency,
Jaegendar,
22-Jan-16 11:00 PM, #23
RE: Consistency,
Sarien,
23-Jan-16 10:58 AM, #24
| |
|
incognito | Fri 22-Jan-16 01:08 PM |
Member since 04th Mar 2003
4495 posts
| |
|
#62414, "I'd say so"
In response to Reply #0
|
Same as corpse thrall can bypass spellbane on a thirsting rager.
|
|
|
|
  |
Dallevian | Fri 22-Jan-16 01:40 PM |
Member since 04th Mar 2003
1649 posts
| |
|
#62417, "isn't that an area spell? nt"
In response to Reply #13
|
|
|
    |
incognito | Fri 22-Jan-16 03:00 PM |
Member since 04th Mar 2003
4495 posts
| |
|
#62420, "Yes but other area spells"
In response to Reply #16
|
Can be baned when thirsting.
|
|
|
|
|
Umiron | Fri 22-Jan-16 09:06 AM |
Member since 29th May 2017
1499 posts
| |
|
#62400, "Makes sense to me. (nt)"
In response to Reply #0
|
|
|
  |
Sarien | Fri 22-Jan-16 09:50 AM |
Member since 14th Feb 2009
740 posts
| |
|
#62401, "Clarification?"
In response to Reply #1
Edited on Fri 22-Jan-16 09:51 AM
|
Do you mean that it makes sense that re-animate bypasses spellbane because it is a physical altered body part being thrown at the target?
Or:
Do you mean it makes sense that it should not bypass spellbane as it is a targeted spell.
If you meant along the lines of the first, then it would stand to reason that things like
pebble to boulder ice shards icicle
and other spells that manifest physical attacks should bypass as well.
|
|
|
|
    |
Bemused | Fri 22-Jan-16 09:52 AM |
Member since 15th Oct 2013
665 posts
| |
|
#62402, "I agree"
In response to Reply #2
|
More spells should bypass spellbane.
|
|
|
|
      |
Sarien | Fri 22-Jan-16 10:00 AM |
Member since 14th Feb 2009
740 posts
| |
|
#62403, "I am fine with it either way - I just want consistency ..."
In response to Reply #3
Edited on Fri 22-Jan-16 10:00 AM
|
It makes "somewhat" sense to me that spells that manifest in a physical nature e.g. I can see how you can't "spellbane" a string of intestines that then strangles you
by the same logic, you shouldn't be able to "spellbane" a boulder flying at you.
Wheras "Spells" that actually affect the rager (muter spells/immolate things of actual magic nature hitting the rager) should obviously be spellbaned.
From a balance perspective it makes more sense that 'targeted' spells are able to be spellbaned.
I am fine with either - I just would like consistency.
|
|
|
|
        |
Kstatida | Fri 22-Jan-16 10:06 AM |
Member since 12th Feb 2015
2214 posts
| |
|
#62406, "Easily"
In response to Reply #4
|
Spellbane is like "anti-magic" sphere.
Incestines should actually "strangle" a rager actively, not just hit him with sheer kinetic force. By getting into the anti-magic sphere, they are no longer animated.
Same goes for ice needles, pebble to boulder and others. If the attack itself is magical (created by magic) - it gets nullified.
If reanimate hurled a skull at 100 km/h, that would be another matter, you'd just get mV^2/2 scientific damage no matter the anti-magic sphere you have.
|
|
|
|
          |
Murphy | Fri 22-Jan-16 10:09 AM |
Member since 30th Dec 2010
1639 posts
| |
|
#62408, "You misspelled Sciontific."
In response to Reply #6
|
|
|
        |
incognito | Fri 22-Jan-16 01:10 PM |
Member since 04th Mar 2003
4495 posts
| |
|
#62415, "Let's make seaweed off limits to ragers"
In response to Reply #4
|
For consistency.
Consistency is overrated at times.
I like that some spells can't be spellbaned.
I don't, however, like that embalmed things can be animated at full strength. I'd rather see only fresh things have full strength.
|
|
|
|
          |
laxman | Fri 22-Jan-16 01:58 PM |
Member since 18th Aug 2003
1867 posts
| |
|
#62418, "got to be balanced for non lich/mummy as well"
In response to Reply #14
|
With spellbane and decent saves a necro is going to only get 1/4 spells through bane unless they constantly thin the veil. A villager has a really solid shot against even undead as long as they don't panic or get slept.
|
|
|
|
            |
Tac | Fri 22-Jan-16 02:07 PM |
Member since 15th Nov 2005
2050 posts
| |
|
#62419, "This is true..."
In response to Reply #17
|
>A villager has a really solid shot against even undead as long >as they don't panic or get slept.
But maybe the fundamental issue is that Lich (and AP to a similar extent) have power based around never dying, and that's harder to balance. You want to make sure they can have fun, while also making it fun for others, which is tough since one side basically can never lose without a giant loss of power than can vary between difficult to impossible to get again.
|
|
|
|
            |
incognito | Fri 22-Jan-16 03:03 PM |
Member since 04th Mar 2003
4495 posts
| |
|
#62422, "They only have to land sleep though"
In response to Reply #17
|
And nearly every villager will die, since not only do they fail to bane when sleeping, their resist may will drop along with spellbane while asleep.
|
|
|
|
      |
Dallevian | Fri 22-Jan-16 10:00 AM |
Member since 04th Mar 2003
1649 posts
| |
|
#62405, "you serious? as a rager with -65svs, reanimate tore th..."
In response to Reply #3
|
1 round lag obliterate damage through rager resist, even had a few annihilates
the spell either needs a more normal damage cap or be changed to 2round lag.
|
|
|
|
        |
laxman | Fri 22-Jan-16 11:55 AM |
Member since 18th Aug 2003
1867 posts
| |
|
#62411, "If you took that much damage..."
In response to Reply #5
|
One or more of the following things was happening
1.) you failed your saving throw (cuts damage in half) 2.) the body part hit a vuln (they can do blunt and mental damage depending on the part) 3.) you were affected by a digit of pain (somewhere between 20-30% damage boost)
Reanimate is a pain to use, embalmed body parts don't last that long without the master embalmer edge and take up inventory space. And with saves and resist you can reduce the damage to mangles, when its that low it shouldn't be a threat to you.
>1 round lag >obliterate damage through rager resist, even had a few >annihilates > >the spell either needs a more normal damage cap or be changed >to 2round lag.
|
|
|
|
          |
Dallevian | Fri 22-Jan-16 12:11 PM |
Member since 04th Mar 2003
1649 posts
| |
|
#62412, "yes, sigil, first thing lich and mummy always open with"
In response to Reply #10
|
and yes, i've seen the vuln hit for an unspeakable once, not on me though.
reanimate isn't a pain to use, it's very easy to gather a handful before a raid.
not my first rodeo.
|
|
|
|
            |
incognito | Fri 22-Jan-16 03:01 PM |
Member since 04th Mar 2003
4495 posts
| |
|
#62421, "I've hit unspeaks with the spell"
In response to Reply #11
|
Without prior maladiction or hitting a vuln.
Also in the log where the mummy fights the Maran there are a series of unspeaks without apparent prior maladiction.
Iirc it was only heads, hands and guts that do that high damage?
|
|
|
|
    |
Umiron | Fri 22-Jan-16 10:07 AM |
Member since 29th May 2017
1499 posts
| |
|
#62407, "RE: Clarification?"
In response to Reply #2
|
I'm fine with spellbane working against projectiles that are manifested by their spells (e.g., an icicle that wasn't there until someone casted a magic). Some of the specific echoes that reanimate uses probably don't fall strictly outside that description, but again, I'm fine with it.
If you demand perfect consistency then CF probably isn't the game for you. It's been designed and built over the course of almost 22 years by dozens of people with no real plans or underlying spec. Consistency is good and I think we do a pretty good job of making things intuitive (based on what similar abilities do, for example), but you'll go mad or bored if you comb through CF looking for inconsistencies in skills, lore, zones, etc., so I don't.
|
|
|
|
      |
Tac | Fri 22-Jan-16 10:19 AM |
Member since 15th Nov 2005
2050 posts
| |
|
#62409, "CF is like the Bible! nt"
In response to Reply #7
|
|
|
      |
TJHuron | Fri 22-Jan-16 12:59 PM |
Member since 28th Nov 2007
1132 posts
| |
|
#62413, "Correct me if I'm wrong but before this post it DID byp..."
In response to Reply #7
|
|
|
        |
Umiron | Fri 22-Jan-16 01:14 PM |
Member since 29th May 2017
1499 posts
| |
|
#62416, "Yes. I changed nothing. (nt)"
In response to Reply #12
|
|
|
    |
Jormyr | Fri 22-Jan-16 10:11 PM |
Member since 31st Dec 2014
423 posts
| |
|
#62423, "RE: Consistency"
In response to Reply #2
|
Umiron and I were actually recently discussing the aspect of things like fireshield vs. a flaming sword. On one side, it might be a metal sword that's on fire, at which point you're taking no damage, even though you're being smacked in the face with 15lb of steel. Or, it might be a magical, purely flame sword, where fireshield makes sense you'd be immune. In a perfect world, we'd chop all the damage apart at apply each separately. Unfortunately, I didn't win the powerball and so wasn't able to convince Umiron to quit his job to dig into THAT mess.
If we really wanted to try to apply some logic to these, you could argue that the actual projectile in anything most invoker spells is purely magical. The boulder is ACTUALLY a pebble, and the rager's just shrugging of that pebble. Iceshards aren't some sciency freezing process, it's just summoning ice from a magical plane, and rager can ignore it. On the flip side, these reanimated parts actually exist, and barring magical dead things, are themselves nonmagical. The magic's just affecting the item itself. Just like a rager gets hit full force from an enchanted sword.
Off the top of my head, I believe I can think of at least one simple counter to this spell, though unfortunately the current undead people using it would be immune. Personally, I don't think the spell is out of line, just someone's using it particularly effectively, and both Battle and necromancers are some of my go-to characters. The only aspect I'd be particularly concerned with is being certain it does have some form of a save. Beyond that, I'm good with a crafty necromancer making use of their tools.
|
|
|
|
      |
Jaegendar | Fri 22-Jan-16 11:00 PM |
Member since 30th May 2014
136 posts
| |
|
#62424, "RE: Consistency"
In response to Reply #22
|
Or you could be an assassin and take that deflect missile edge. I wonder how effective it would be....
-Jaegendar
|
|
|
|
|