>>so, say you going to fight seodemaors, you'd put up a gf to electricity? would this at any way hinder your abilities if you are attuned to fire?

The answer has not changed since last time you asked the question, Grounding Field has no relationship whatsoever to elemental alignment. Casting Grounding Field attuned to anything will have the exact same impact (or lack of impact) as casting, say, Gar Zeng.

-Raesh

"Ever notice that B.A.'s flavor text swells in direct proportion to how much one of our characters is getting screwed?" - Brian Van Hoose

LB = Fire/Elec (it's sort of an odd ball here lacking any physical)
GZ = Fire/Elec/Puncture (I'm... surprised by how many electricity spells do fire honestly).
CL = Fire/Elec/Impact

The other two you asked about aren't updated for 3.0 yet.

There's certainly an argument to be made that some of those should change, and I've heard some requests that we add a way to find out what sort of damage a spell does but I'm not sure offhand what form that information would take if we decide to go that route.

-Raesh

"Ever notice that B.A.'s flavor text swells in direct proportion to how much one of our characters is getting screwed?" - Brian Van Hoose

>Is it so they can ignite naphtha?

Not all fire damage ignites naphtha (see blood burst) so I'm guessing there's a seperate flag for igniting naphtha, which has nothing to do with actually being fire damage. Just a guess, though.

Elemental Lord Opieus, Master Warrior Mage of Elanthia
"For a bunch of radical empiricists, the Philosophers' system relies on a whole lot of faith." ~Armifer

Speaking of naphtha, has anyone tested naphtha in 3.0? Against this spell in particular, and in general? Does naphtha actually teach yet?

Elemental Lord Opieus, Master Warrior Mage of Elanthia
"For a bunch of radical empiricists, the Philosophers' system relies on a whole lot of faith." ~Armifer

Is there any chance we could be told what damage types TM spells are doing? I realize that may be a lot of work/documentation, but I think it would greatly improve testing data.

Or, my other really cool idea would be for us to APPRAISE a TM spell when we're prepping/targeting it, just like a weapon, so we can see what kind of damage it does, how strong it is with the amount of mana we're using, etc.

GENT

PAFO

>>I anticipate this spell being a lot more useful once everyone's wielding their fashionable +2 fire swords of slaying (i.e. enchanting comes out and players can more reliably do elemental damage outside of spells).

Even then the usefulness is kind of weird to me. If they'd have a fire sword to pull out in lieu of a metal one, they might also have an electric one too or a boomerang or something silly? Specially since there's no way to drop it the field.

*I guess it was working okay when we tested it, like a buffed ES, as far as effect, but it was hard to tell cause of impact/slice/puncture damage. Still the damage seemed less(3.0 stuff still takes adjusting and hard to tell on top of all that new stuff). We didn't test it too much though.

-Also the messaging for frostbite block seemeed weird on both ends, nothing really on the casters end. No damage caused or anything.

**It seemed more useful AGAINST people who had it up- after I casted frostbite, I blasted Cyia with a hot water geyser, the spell did the flippy thing and nuked her spectacularly. Awesome, reminded me of old SOP that was a devastating debuff...
And 'No' for those wondering we can only self-cast it.

Against critters it seems pretty awesome(if I could find one with magic), but trying to keep track of the main element type of damage spells do without a lot of substitutions seems a bit much. I figure most spells will be fire or elec, and holy cold(maybe? makes sense to me?).

Shy of fighting a cabalist or knowing the elemental limitation of other guilds it seems like it might actually be really bad to cast this spell.

or like... hey "there's Power, I'm guessing he'll ignite that sword, cast MOA on me, cast Fire Rain, and barrage a fireball at me after an ANC or IP(maybe even AL)." Still gonna hurt like hell, but a little less from FR and FB, and none from ignite and and all that MOA. Unless of course the field causes IP(?) or AL(probably) to amp up, and sets you up even better for a slightly weakend barrage of murder.
Assuming there wasn't some wacky buff/debuff, disabler game or they just threw a hammer at me...

_________________________________
An agonizing pain fills you as you feel your tongue turn to powder in your mouth! Through a haze of uncertainty and loss, you realize that something you just said was very wrong.

>>Yeah I can see this spell being a double edged sword in PvP, but absolutely awesome in PvE, Invasions and Quests.

Basically this.

Most of the limitations exist so the spell doesn't utterly dominate PvP while still letting it be an incredible PvE spell.

-Raesh

"Ever notice that B.A.'s flavor text swells in direct proportion to how much one of our characters is getting screwed?" - Brian Van Hoose

>I was just surprised to see the spell made, as, at the risk of sounding like I'm getting to a GvG argument, Necromancers are supposed to have the most potent anti-magic barrier in the game. I understand this is a very double edged sword protection spell, but FULL negation of incoming magic, irregardless of skill discrepancy, seems to be an anti-magic barrier like none other.


Except it's extremely niche in what it negates, and doesn't negate all of a spell. Sure, I can have an anti-fire field up, but the impact damage from fireball is still gonna wreck me (just not as bad as it might have). And on the flip side, that lightning bolt will fry me even faster than before.

There are almost no effects in the game that are wholly a single elemental damage type and nothing else.

---

I like the spell, though even as a fair sized WM I'm not sure it's worth the two slots I'd spend on it for it's limited usage. My 80 something spell slots go fast between over 70 slots of WM spells, 10ish of AP spells, and 33 magic feats to choose from.

>>I was just surprised to see the spell made, as, at the risk of sounding like I'm getting to a GvG argument, Necromancers are supposed to have the most potent anti-magic barrier in the game.

Even better than Barbarians?

---

Individuals, families, countries, continents are destroyed at the heavy hand of Vinjince.

-GM Abasha

It used to be absolutely impossible for me to get past Worm's Mist in 2.0. I'm curious how I'd fare in 3.0 actually.

~ Leilond
http://i67.photobucket.com/albums/h307/ss1shadow/Leilond_Progression.jpg

> I was able to get Albreda's Balm through the Worm's Mist of a slightly higher-skilled Necro than my Bard, with 99 charisma vs 99 discipline (I'm not certain the full contests involved are off the top of my head).

Getting through a barrier isn't a stat contest, it's Worm's potency vs Balm's integrity, which is mostly based on mana used.

Traps are not a combat mechanic and it's unlikely they're passing through the barrier system.

-Raesh

"Ever notice that B.A.'s flavor text swells in direct proportion to how much one of our characters is getting screwed?" - Brian Van Hoose