Would it be possible to use the same or a similar formula for spell duration when using 208 to steal spells as is used for invoking scrolls, rather than the current system of nothing?
Thanks for your consideration =)
Peace cannot be kept by force; it can only be achieved by understanding. - Albert Einstein
LORDKRIP
LORDKRIP
Re: Living Spell
09/18/2013 07:37 AM CDT
Bump
Peace cannot be kept by force; it can only be achieved by understanding. - Albert Einstein
Peace cannot be kept by force; it can only be achieved by understanding. - Albert Einstein
LORDKRIP
Re: Living Spell
10/22/2013 06:32 PM CDT
Bump?
Peace cannot be kept by force; it can only be achieved by understanding. - Albert Einstein
Peace cannot be kept by force; it can only be achieved by understanding. - Albert Einstein
GS4-ESTILD
Re: Living Spell
10/22/2013 08:07 PM CDT
| LORDKRIP |
| Would it be possible to use the same or a similar formula for spell duration when using 208 to steal spells as is used for invoking scrolls, rather than the current system of nothing? |
Living Spell's (208) benefit for stealing defensive spells already got a pretty good boost when we upgraded the base duration of all spells to 1200 seconds a while back. I don't see a need to further increase duration for stolen spells.
GameMaster Estild
LORDKRIP
Re: Living Spell
10/23/2013 05:15 AM CDT
Ok. Thanks for the reply, Estild. I hadn't really considered the blanket spell duration update as a benefit/upgrade to Living Spell. That said, it makes sense.
My position came from the following to perspectives.
It's always felt a little underwhelming to steal spells from creatures. You gamble and either get an offensive spell, sometimes a useful one, sometimes not, or you get a defensive spell and likewise sometimes it's useful and sometimes it's not.
Regarding players, we'll just steal as much as they can tolerate/we want, so increase to duration just cuts down on tedium for everyone.
The idea being that it helps make the spell less of a tool for just stacking up spells major spiritualists don't have access to, and turns it into something that can really pay off when used hunting.
Peace cannot be kept by force; it can only be achieved by understanding. - Albert Einstein
My position came from the following to perspectives.
It's always felt a little underwhelming to steal spells from creatures. You gamble and either get an offensive spell, sometimes a useful one, sometimes not, or you get a defensive spell and likewise sometimes it's useful and sometimes it's not.
Regarding players, we'll just steal as much as they can tolerate/we want, so increase to duration just cuts down on tedium for everyone.
The idea being that it helps make the spell less of a tool for just stacking up spells major spiritualists don't have access to, and turns it into something that can really pay off when used hunting.
Peace cannot be kept by force; it can only be achieved by understanding. - Albert Einstein
THROGG
Re: Living Spell
10/24/2013 08:20 PM CDT
>>It's always felt a little underwhelming to steal spells from creatures.<<
I'll second that. I think I have used 208 twice, and was not impressed. Does my cleric really want to cast boil earth back at that archwight? Isn't hold undead more effective? (Assuming an effective CS:TD ratio, of course; but if you didn't have that in the first place, 208 would likely fail also). As for stealing defensive spells from other characters ... foo! My gals all are designed to be self sufficient; they never ask for "massies" or spell ups. At most they might use a white crystal and a statue. Besides, pretty much anything you want can be found on scrolls or imbeds; my warriors and rogues all get plenty of MIU and AS skill just in case they really need something from a scroll or item.
In short, if Living Spell were to suddenly vanish from the spell lexicon, I doubt I'd even be aware of it.
The bells of Hell
go ting-a-ling-a-ling
for you but not for me
I'll second that. I think I have used 208 twice, and was not impressed. Does my cleric really want to cast boil earth back at that archwight? Isn't hold undead more effective? (Assuming an effective CS:TD ratio, of course; but if you didn't have that in the first place, 208 would likely fail also). As for stealing defensive spells from other characters ... foo! My gals all are designed to be self sufficient; they never ask for "massies" or spell ups. At most they might use a white crystal and a statue. Besides, pretty much anything you want can be found on scrolls or imbeds; my warriors and rogues all get plenty of MIU and AS skill just in case they really need something from a scroll or item.
In short, if Living Spell were to suddenly vanish from the spell lexicon, I doubt I'd even be aware of it.
The bells of Hell
go ting-a-ling-a-ling
for you but not for me
PRICKLIES
Re: Living Spell
10/24/2013 09:17 PM CDT
>>I'll second that. I think I have used 208 twice, and was not impressed. Does my cleric really want to cast boil earth back at that archwight? Isn't hold undead more effective? (Assuming an effective CS:TD ratio, of course; but if you didn't have that in the first place, 208 would likely fail also).
I've only used Living Spell out of curiosity. Real example: what was that krolvin slaver trying to cast at me? It had no chance of ever warding me, but Krakiipedia doesn't actually list what warding spell they might have. 208ing enough of them, I discovered the answer. And lo, I did update Krakiipedia, that the world might know: http://www.krakiipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Krolvin_slaver&diff=prev&oldid=38134 (It was Bind.)
So, yeah, 208 was useful for me that one time.
I've only used Living Spell out of curiosity. Real example: what was that krolvin slaver trying to cast at me? It had no chance of ever warding me, but Krakiipedia doesn't actually list what warding spell they might have. 208ing enough of them, I discovered the answer. And lo, I did update Krakiipedia, that the world might know: http://www.krakiipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Krolvin_slaver&diff=prev&oldid=38134 (It was Bind.)
So, yeah, 208 was useful for me that one time.
THROGG
Re: Living Spell
10/24/2013 11:17 PM CDT
>>So, yeah, 208 was useful for me that one time.<<
Heeh! Congratulations! You found a use for the spell! It would not have occurred to me to use it just to identify what spell was being cast by a critter. But still, a spell should be useful more than once in a character's lifetime. How about making it more useful? Maybe a target TD pushdown?
The bells of Hell
go ting-a-ling-a-ling
for you but not for me
Heeh! Congratulations! You found a use for the spell! It would not have occurred to me to use it just to identify what spell was being cast by a critter. But still, a spell should be useful more than once in a character's lifetime. How about making it more useful? Maybe a target TD pushdown?
The bells of Hell
go ting-a-ling-a-ling
for you but not for me
THROGG
Re: Living Spell
10/24/2013 11:20 PM CDT
Oh, and get rid of that bit where you get injured if you fail to control the stolen spell. It's just another reason to never use the spell in a combat situation.
The bells of Hell
go ting-a-ling-a-ling
for you but not for me
The bells of Hell
go ting-a-ling-a-ling
for you but not for me
KRAKII
Re: Living Spell
10/25/2013 08:40 AM CDT
When cast at a creature target--NOT at a player...--you can specify a second parameter in the 'cast' command, with the spell number/mnemonic of the spell you want. This gives a -10 to the d100 roll, but if you still succeed the creature loses whatever spell it did have prepped, and you get the prepped version of the spell that you specified (as long as the creature can cast that spell at all).
In other words, you see the Warfarer barking a magic phrase, and you "cast warfarer 415" to release its spell AND get Elemental Strike prepped to use against it. Or "cast warfarer elemwave", or whatever.
.
I put in the penalty to make it harder to go find Ranger casting critters and toke up on Self Control & Mobility, et cetera.
In other words, you see the Warfarer barking a magic phrase, and you "cast warfarer 415" to release its spell AND get Elemental Strike prepped to use against it. Or "cast warfarer elemwave", or whatever.
.
I put in the penalty to make it harder to go find Ranger casting critters and toke up on Self Control & Mobility, et cetera.
ROLFARD
Re: Living Spell
10/25/2013 09:46 AM CDT
208 has massive capabilities often overlooked. I hardly use it but it can give access to almost all those hard to find self cast only spells. It can be used by any profession since it is found on scrolls and can be made in a chrism.
No changes please unless the plan is to increase duration of stolen spells from other PCs to natural duration to save on chrisms and scrolls.
No changes please unless the plan is to increase duration of stolen spells from other PCs to natural duration to save on chrisms and scrolls.
LORDKRIP
Re: Living Spell
10/25/2013 10:11 AM CDT
>>208 has massive capabilities often overlooked. <<
The last time I had a good use for the spell, I think I was doing something unintended. Since now, nobody can use the runes associated with scroll infusion anymore but sorcerers. =( My bad.
I did enjoy easily unlocking and infusing heroism and raise dead scrolls for a while though.
Peace cannot be kept by force; it can only be achieved by understanding. - Albert Einstein
The last time I had a good use for the spell, I think I was doing something unintended. Since now, nobody can use the runes associated with scroll infusion anymore but sorcerers. =( My bad.
I did enjoy easily unlocking and infusing heroism and raise dead scrolls for a while though.
Peace cannot be kept by force; it can only be achieved by understanding. - Albert Einstein
THORNBROOK
Re: Living Spell
10/25/2013 03:47 PM CDT
>>When cast at a creature target--NOT at a player...--you can specify a second parameter in the 'cast' command, with the spell number/mnemonic of the spell you want. This gives a -10 to the d100 roll, but if you still succeed the creature loses whatever spell it did have prepped, and you get the prepped version of the spell that you specified (as long as the creature can cast that spell at all).
Uh...I'd never have thought to even try this approach. Very neat bit of info thanks for sharing Krakii.
KRAKII
Re: Living Spell
10/25/2013 04:17 PM CDT
Thornbrook, that was a suggestion that I was putting forward... not something that actually works right now. :) It looked like we were getting into "ways to make the spell not suck," so I wanted to kick in my two cents.
THORNBROOK
Re: Living Spell
10/25/2013 05:23 PM CDT
Oh. Well darnit I already saved that into my notes and was prepared to browse KP to see what spells creatures were out there casting. Ah well.
