Re: [crossfire] Spellcasting skills definition

[David Hurst]

Hi Kevin,

Aside from flipping sorcery and evocation, the spells that needed
reassigning were bullets,a couple of odd ball summoning spells and ball
lightning:

Level Spell Current Manual
1 Create Missile Summoning Evocation
1 Small Bullet Evocation Evocation
2 Summon Fog Summoning Evocation
8 Large Bullet Evocation Evocation
14 Bullet Swarm Evocation Evocation
18 Ball Lightning Evocation Pyromancy
20 Bullet Storm Evocation Evocation
24 Build Bullet Wall Evocation Evocation
**note evocation is a change because all other evocation spells are moved
to sorcery and vice versa.*

In the current assignment, evocation has the most damaging spells while
sorcery has the least. If you toggle between the current and proposed, you
will notice that the lines actually track much closer together in the
proposed assignment.This is going to make training in each school more
consistent.

Regards,
Saru






On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 4:14 AM, Kevin Zheng  wrote:

> On 09/14/2017 06:03, David Hurst wrote:
> > To try and make some progress on this front I created a visualisation to
> > see what these changes might look like. Take a look here
> >  CrossfireSpellsVisualisation/Spellassignmentdashboard?publish=yes>.
> > I focused on only the spells that can provide exp, I can load the other
> > skills if there is a strong desire to see the impact. As mentioned I
> > don't think there is a particularly significant effect by using
> > consistent spell schools definitions but i'm open to your feedback.
> > The data i'm using is available here
> >  J4TkYzUe_5IpKg/edit?usp=sharing>.
> >
> > As a reminder the proposed schools are:
> > Evocation - Spells that create things (physical damage, food,
> strengthening)
> > Sorcery - Spells that remove energy (cold spells, poison, draining?,
> > depletion?)
> > Pyromancy - Spells that add energy (fire, lightning, light)
> > Summoning - Spells that call and control monsters (golems, pets, etc)
> > Praying - Spells gifted by channeling your gods wishes through prayer
>
> I believe this discussion came up on IRC, but how do you see training
> experience in the new spell organization to work?
>
> The current classifications are a bit arbitrary but it seems that each
> spell school has a good balance of spells.
>
> --
> Kevin Zheng
> kevinz5...@gmail.com | kev...@berkeley.edu | PGP: 0xC22E1090
> ___
> crossfire mailing list
> crossfire@metalforge.org
> http://mailman.metalforge.org/mailman/listinfo/crossfire
>
___
crossfire mailing list
crossfire@metalforge.org
http://mailman.metalforge.org/mailman/listinfo/crossfire

Re: [crossfire] Spellcasting skills definition

[Kevin Zheng]

On 09/14/2017 06:03, David Hurst wrote:
> To try and make some progress on this front I created a visualisation to
> see what these changes might look like. Take a look here
> .
> I focused on only the spells that can provide exp, I can load the other
> skills if there is a strong desire to see the impact. As mentioned I
> don't think there is a particularly significant effect by using
> consistent spell schools definitions but i'm open to your feedback.
> The data i'm using is available here
> .
> 
> As a reminder the proposed schools are:
> Evocation - Spells that create things (physical damage, food, strengthening)
> Sorcery - Spells that remove energy (cold spells, poison, draining?,
> depletion?)
> Pyromancy - Spells that add energy (fire, lightning, light)
> Summoning - Spells that call and control monsters (golems, pets, etc)
> Praying - Spells gifted by channeling your gods wishes through prayer

I believe this discussion came up on IRC, but how do you see training
experience in the new spell organization to work?

The current classifications are a bit arbitrary but it seems that each
spell school has a good balance of spells.

-- 
Kevin Zheng
kevinz5...@gmail.com | kev...@berkeley.edu | PGP: 0xC22E1090
___
crossfire mailing list
crossfire@metalforge.org
http://mailman.metalforge.org/mailman/listinfo/crossfire

Re: [crossfire] Spellcasting skills definition

[David Hurst]

To try and make some progress on this front I created a visualisation to
see what these changes might look like. Take a look here

.
I focused on only the spells that can provide exp, I can load the other
skills if there is a strong desire to see the impact. As mentioned I don't
think there is a particularly significant effect by using consistent spell
schools definitions but i'm open to your feedback.
The data i'm using is available here

.

As a reminder the proposed schools are:
Evocation - Spells that create things (physical damage, food, strengthening)
Sorcery - Spells that remove energy (cold spells, poison, draining?,
depletion?)
Pyromancy - Spells that add energy (fire, lightning, light)
Summoning - Spells that call and control monsters (golems, pets, etc)
Praying - Spells gifted by channeling your gods wishes through prayer

On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 2:29 PM, Mark Wedel  wrote:

> On 08/21/2017 05:49 PM, David Hurst wrote:
>
>> As stated, i'm trying to enhance the messages that players receive when
>> learning spells. To make this more engaging I wanted to have a clear
>> picture of what we all think these spellcasting skills represent. As a
>> starting point I presented this list as a definition of what is *currently
>> *in place:
>>
>> Evocation - Spells
>> that remove energy (cold spells, poison, draining?, depletion?)
>> Sorcery - Spells
>> that create things (physical damage, food, strengthening)
>> Pyromancy - Spells
>> that add energy (fire, lightning, light)
>> Summoning - Spells
>> that call and control monsters (golems, pets, etc)
>> Praying - Spells
>> gifted by channeling your gods wishes through prayer
>>
>> You can check the above links to see what spells are currently available
>> for each skill. I don't think the spells that are in the wrong place are
>> not even remotely going to cause balance issues. Large bullet moving to
>> sorcery is not going to break evocation which currently has all of the cold
>> spells to level with including icestorm at level 1. Ball lightning moving
>> to pyromancy isn't going to wreck evocation.
>>
>> Having said that, I had this thought as I was writing the text for
>> evocation and it dawned on me that I have no idea what evocation actually
>> is. Ruben pointed out (and I agree with him) that the current spells don't
>> line up very well with historical definitions of evocation <
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evocation>and sorcery <
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sorcery>. As far as I can tell it would be
>> straightforward to flip all the spells in the two skills over so that we
>> have:
>>
>> Evocation - Spells that create things (physical damage, food,
>> strengthening)
>> Sorcery - Spells that remove energy (cold spells, poison, draining?,
>> depletion?)
>> Pyromancy - Spells that add energy (fire, lightning, light)
>> Summoning - Spells that call and control monsters (golems, pets, etc)
>> Praying - Spells gifted by channeling your gods wishes through prayer
>>
>
>  The definitions can be hard to map, because in dungeons of dragons,
> things like fireball, lightning bolt, and almost all damage spells are in
> the 'evocation' school (they have different and more schools, so there
> isn't a 1:1 mapping)
>
>  As Leaf noted, in the past, there was some issues with balance in schools
> - sorcery didn't have enough damage spells, so was hard to level.  Note
> that there also isn't any reason that there can't be some overlap in those
> skills - certainly the reason that there was pyromancy in addition to
> evocation is all the fire spells got put in evocation, it would have been
> an overly good skill. And in some cases, I think there is basically the
> same spell (with slightly different name) in multiple skills.
>
>   I'm not sure if you are looking for definition only, or if you plan to
> move some spells to different skills.  If the former, it will probably be
> hard to really come up with too good a definition that covers everything
> for the reasons above (this spell matches pyromancy definiton, why is it in
> evocation, etc).
>
>  If you are going to move spells around, you could also rename the skills
> if so desired at that point to have better mapping (not that I necessary
> have better ideas for new names).  I think summoning is the most well
> defined and clear cut.  But there are also some spells which got dumped
> into sorcery as it was basically the catchall for anything that did not fit
> evocation, pyromancy, or summoning.
>
>