Wouldn't regents just be like talismands? Perhapse if one doesn't have the regent the spell should be only be 1/2 or 1/3rd as powerfull then with the regent (for spells that 'need' regents)?
--- Mark Wedel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > My personal thoughts: > > doing this should be based on gameplay, not > sorcery vs witchcraft or any of > that type of things. > > I'm a little reluctant to do it food based - for > some characters, it is enough a > pain just to find enough food on some maps, if I now > have to worry that I'm > eating the right type of food, that just adds a lot > of hassle. > > However, having continued consumption of some food > times giving bonuses seems > reasonable. At the same time, if a character stops > eating those foods, those > bonuses should go away. This could perhaps be done > by very long lived forces - > eating the corresponding food creates the force, and > each time you eat it, the > duration of the force is increased (to some > maximum). > > But to me, that is seperate from the reagants. > > Doing reagants probably wouldn't be hard. But if > done, I think the following > should be considered: > > 1) Prepared reagants for most (all?) spells shoud be > available in shops. That > said, you may not get reagants for destruction in > scorn, but in brest perhaps. > It shouldn't be a requirement that I be an alchemist > as a spell caster. That > said, a caster could make them if he wanted to (and > save money). > > (following from economics, if there is demand, > people would make it). > > 2) PRices for reagants, especially for high level > spells, could be quite costly. > 1000 pp to cast comet? > > 3) Reagants should be quite light, so that you can > carry a bunch of them without > much effect on weight (or perhaps give players a > reagant pouch that reduces > weight quite a bit). > > 4) Not all spells should necessarily require > reagants. Most lower level spells > perhaps shouldn't, with more requirement for higher > level spells. > > 5) Use of reagants should be similar to arrows, eg, > happens automatically. > Player shouldn't have to be fumbling through their > inventory for them. > > 6) Could perhaps be interesting to have alternate > reagants for spells with > different effects (less or more powerful, etc). > > > > The basic gist of this is don't want to make it > such a pain to play > spellcasters that no one does so. If I can only > carry 50 reagants and have to > keep popping back to town, what fun is that? > Likewise, if I have to be hunting > through the forest looking for some herb for a > spell, I'd not consider that > especially fun either. > > That said, pricey reagants could certainly make > using some spells less appealing. > > > _______________________________________________ > crossfire mailing list > [email protected] > http://mailman.metalforge.org/mailman/listinfo/crossfire > __________________________________ Start your day with Yahoo! - Make it your home page! http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs _______________________________________________ crossfire mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.metalforge.org/mailman/listinfo/crossfire
