The concept behind redux is good but something about the implementation doesn't seem right. As a suggestion, consider making redux partly based on spells learned, partly based on spells worn. For example, an unspelled character has 100% of the redux available to him, based on his training. As he puts more buffs up his redux goes down. If he wears too many spells, his redux is effectively negated.
I'm sure many players won't like the suggestion, but this would give characters a boost when they aren't wearing spells. The current redux formula would need to be revised upward a bit. It would need to allow a measure of unspelled redux for all professions, even those with lots of spell training (just a little bit; squares would still be better at it). Once this is done, players could make a choice between wearing many spells and foregoing redux, wearing just a few and keeping some redux, or wearing none and getting full redux. The devil's in the details, but I think it could be implemented in a way that isn't a nerf for most people, and it would add considerably more strategy to spelling up.
KANDOR
KHARIZ555
Re: Redux and spells
10/18/2017 10:38 PM CDT
Uh, not thank you. If it start working like that, I cancel all my accounts instantaneously.
ARCHIGEEK
Re: Redux and spells
10/23/2017 01:45 PM CDT
If you only knew how much redux has been watered down already. You may be surprised to hear that armor is a bigger factor in defense than redux if you're wearing full plate. Today, with the advent of semi-dux, redux is a much broader version than its former self, (impacts more classes but impacts the square class less). Your suggestion would further move things in that direction.
To illustrate, wee could apply the same principle to stick-du, aka: magical runestaff defense of magical stick-ness. I mean, let's face it, it's largely a copy of redux with a DS instead of DF anyway, so why not apply the same logic? Here's how it would work: if you take on more spells that aren't self-cast, you lose some of your stick-provided defense. Use more and get less DS from your runestaff, and if you train over a combined 100 ranks in CM, weapon skills, and MOC, you lose all of it. The latter is basically how redux works now, where if you train over 100 ranks of spells you'll lose all of your redux.
The question of whether or not outside spells are a good thing for the game comes up now and again, but usually people only really want to implement it from a position of strength. My question to you is, what shoe is on what foot for you? Would you be OK with my suggestion if implemented in conjunction with yours? Because it's basically the same thing except it reverses which classes get their defense diminished.
Kerl
To illustrate, wee could apply the same principle to stick-du, aka: magical runestaff defense of magical stick-ness. I mean, let's face it, it's largely a copy of redux with a DS instead of DF anyway, so why not apply the same logic? Here's how it would work: if you take on more spells that aren't self-cast, you lose some of your stick-provided defense. Use more and get less DS from your runestaff, and if you train over a combined 100 ranks in CM, weapon skills, and MOC, you lose all of it. The latter is basically how redux works now, where if you train over 100 ranks of spells you'll lose all of your redux.
The question of whether or not outside spells are a good thing for the game comes up now and again, but usually people only really want to implement it from a position of strength. My question to you is, what shoe is on what foot for you? Would you be OK with my suggestion if implemented in conjunction with yours? Because it's basically the same thing except it reverses which classes get their defense diminished.
Kerl
LEAFIARA
Re: Redux and spells
10/23/2017 03:26 PM CDT
If anything I'd just want a straightforward buff to redux, not a complicated tweak. I already think it's silly that there's anything in the game that you can train and lose something in the process.
I do understand you wanting more strategy to the game if that's your main idea (I don't think it is since you only mentioned it briefly at the end), but spelling up definitely isn't where I'd add strategy. For one thing, we already have spellburst for that... But more importantly, spelling up is crucial to the social interaction of GS and to much of the game economy with scrolls, imbeds, x/day magic items, and so on. I don't want to see new incentives not to share spells, sell scrolls among players, have sorcerers infuse and wizards recharge, etc.
I do understand you wanting more strategy to the game if that's your main idea (I don't think it is since you only mentioned it briefly at the end), but spelling up definitely isn't where I'd add strategy. For one thing, we already have spellburst for that... But more importantly, spelling up is crucial to the social interaction of GS and to much of the game economy with scrolls, imbeds, x/day magic items, and so on. I don't want to see new incentives not to share spells, sell scrolls among players, have sorcerers infuse and wizards recharge, etc.
KANDOR
Re: Redux and spells
10/23/2017 10:17 PM CDT
>My question to you is, what shoe is on what foot for you? Would you be OK with my suggestion if implemented in conjunction with yours? Because it's basically the same thing except it reverses which classes get their defense diminished.
I mean no disrespect to any profession in particular. Yes, I would implement something like this for runestaves if there was a decent approach that added more than it took away. As far as motives, there are a number of contributing factors, tangents that might benefit from this, but I suppose one of the larger goals of the suggestion is to counteract spelling-up-to-the-gills, which seems much more common today than it was in the past. The redux suggestion, I think, would reward players overall by increasing base redux but especially reward for MODERATION of tactics instead of maximizing. As a concept, that's pretty unusual in this game, and I think there are a few places that it could really work. I know spellburst exists in some areas, and I think it's a pretty decent system as long as the critters inside are balanced with this in mind. Yes, it's a pain, because it requires different tactics and also puts our characters at risk. The same can be said for many things. I'd like to see more of these. That said, maybe adjusting redux isn't the right approach. There are a number of other systems that could increase or decrease with spells worn.
I mean no disrespect to any profession in particular. Yes, I would implement something like this for runestaves if there was a decent approach that added more than it took away. As far as motives, there are a number of contributing factors, tangents that might benefit from this, but I suppose one of the larger goals of the suggestion is to counteract spelling-up-to-the-gills, which seems much more common today than it was in the past. The redux suggestion, I think, would reward players overall by increasing base redux but especially reward for MODERATION of tactics instead of maximizing. As a concept, that's pretty unusual in this game, and I think there are a few places that it could really work. I know spellburst exists in some areas, and I think it's a pretty decent system as long as the critters inside are balanced with this in mind. Yes, it's a pain, because it requires different tactics and also puts our characters at risk. The same can be said for many things. I'd like to see more of these. That said, maybe adjusting redux isn't the right approach. There are a number of other systems that could increase or decrease with spells worn.
