Magic and Ranged Disruption

[Eatuck]

I wanted to throw out another idea regarding balance. I was speaking with my guild mates about this and we thought that magic and ranged skills need to be disrupted by hits. If an archer is trying to shoot or mage casting, they should be disrupted by an axe or other weapon. These skills are highly effective at a range (offensive) but they should be at a disadvantage in close combat. This would create more balance among the skills.

[dadela]

She agrees! Totally! Fully! Absolutelly! This should be as she is! Someone with hammer in the head should be silent. May be.. Most likely! And dead for sure. Mayhaps? Shouldn't they?.. Last time I hit someone shouting annoying and deadly spells they died. They should, for sure! And they should stay still while doing their annoying magic. It is hard to hit moving target! Annoying! Running and walking archer feels wrong too. They have to die too. Sure they have. I know! It takes only one claw to kill a thing, but noone should die because of arrow in.. ahem-the head or lava bulb around you. Not fair! Should come close and fight in honour! And die quick! Annoying mages and archers. Oh! They should fight naked too. That'd be funny.

Good idea! We should answer with hummiliation we had in years from these mages! May be. Who knows?

[Eonwind]

The system as of now already use this system: spellcasting is interrupted when taking a certain amount of damage. As of now it's about 30% caster's current HPs, maybe it's abit too high (but is not very easy to fine tune this value).

[Eatuck]

Thank you for the response Eonwind. The reason I (and others) have not noticed this is because the damage requirement is really high as you said. I would think a much lower percentage should be necessary because any kind of direct hit would affect a spell caster or archer.

[Rigwyn]

Consider too the specific effects that various spells *should* have on one's opponent. If someone is hit with a high level fire spell, should they just take it on the chin as if punched and keep hacking away with their axe like they are chopping down a tree? Or should they be freaking out and on fire like an ant under a magnifying glass? The same goes for spells that cause fear, blindness, freezing and so on.

A lot of this detail is lost on both ends (fighter and mage) in PVP fights. It just tuns into a something that resembles two Rock'em Sock'em robots trying to pop each other's heads off.

What? You never heard of Rock'em Sock'em Robots? OK. I feel old now...   

[Taya]

Consider too the specific effects that various spells *should* have on one's opponent. If someone is hit with a high level fire spell, should they just take it on the chin as if punched and keep hacking away with their axe like they are chopping down a tree? Or should they be freaking out and on fire like an ant under a magnifying glass? The same goes for spells that cause fear, blindness, freezing and so on.

This really. It wouldn't be very fair to have weapon attacks disrupting spells if spells can't do the same sorts of things back in turn. And I don't simply mean status specific spells that don't do damage, as weapon attacks would still do damage as well as a status effect if such a thing was implemented.

Also keep in mind that in the higher levels, there is no cap on max weapon damage whereas there is for spells, and it's also far easier to protect yourself against one or two magic ways than it is to protect yourself against weapon damage. Archery may have a larger advantage here as it has the range and the lack of a cap as far as I know, but I never experimented with it much.

But I really don't think weapon use should disrupt spells more severally unless damage spells can also slow the approach of an attacker or make them stagger somehow, because I would think a massive burning fist should be able to do the same as a weapon when it comes to this kind of thing.

I think balancing these combat mechanics is going to take a while either way sadly. Maybe we should all just resort to playing with those weird looking robots Rigwyn shared to settle these problems?

[novacadian]

In the traditions of rpg magic one point makes sense in the way the melee/magic seems to have evolved in PS the other does. Tradition has the onus on the magic user to loose concentration when struck. They are chanting or making mudras. The fighter shakes their head and moves on.

The difference is that in PS the spells are very combat centric to my knowledge; which is not that of an expert. If more spells did things like web the opponent from a distance yet could web others by mistake then the tradition could be upheld and balanced. When every mage is a battlemage, and none a wizard, it is a whole different story.
 
Depends what you are looking for. My preference leans toward the traditional approaches.

- Nova

[Edit: Maybe it is not as easy to balance two opposing forces as it would be to balance three. Create a wizard like way which is useless in a fight yet benifical to a group from the rear. Allow only study in that one way. If any noticable amount of study in other ways is done they could not longer continue and would be removed from that circle.

Then just do a straigh balance on battlemage to fighters. Damage for damage and defence to defence. Just be a matter of how you choose to deliver one's damage.]

[Eonwind]

One more thoughts about that: lately many spells that doesn't deal direct damage but instead entangle/stops the movement, have been introduced, and more will come in time. The reason why not every single way is as powerful in combat like RW is exactly this one: other ways will enjoy different powers and allow for different gameplay styles.
When the magic system will be more "complete" it can be necessary to try to revise the spellcasting interruption. Else a fighter *may* (but it will need to be verified with true testing) happen a mage can always keep its distance and a fighter may never reach him.
On the other hand I don't think every single hit or damage should disrupt spellcasting, that's would be really too much against mages.

[Bonifarzia]

... (but it will need to be verified with true testing) ... a mage can always keep its distance and a fighter may never reach him.

I can actually confirm this, and some may have observed it during the last cup, when Hirene demonstrated that well timed paralyzing spells can pin down a warrior and leave enough time to use other spells to inflict some more damage. A warrior can partially resist this with certain gems, which in return leaves him or her vulnerable to the more offensive ways.
Personally, I think that spells with short casting times would allow more interesting PvP, but those are difficult to handle in terms of practice and the "running interrupts magic" rule.

[Taya]

Tradition has the onus on the magic user to loose concentration when struck. They are chanting or making mudras. The fighter shakes their head and moves on.

I generally dislike tradition when it comes to these things though. It's boring. You can find it absolutely anywhere. Balancing everything correctly is really important (and difficult), but I like to think that the answer doesn't depend on imitation.

[Eatuck]

Great ideas! I agree that there needs to be balance on both sides. If the mages can be disrupted, there should be ways for them try to avoid being disrupted like paralyzing or trapping the opponent. In the archers case, they can knock the character back.

@Taya - It is hard to be completely unique when there has been so many games that have come along with the same type of theme. You could make the dazzling light spell slow the target to make it unique to planeshift but the idea to slow/paralyze the target is the same.

[Taya]

@Taya - It is hard not to be completely unique when there has been so many games that have come along with the same type of theme. You could make the dazzling light spell slow the target to make it unique to planeshift but the idea to slow/paralyze the target is the same.

I'm assuming you mean hard to be, not hard not to be, but that's not really my point. Some things get copied because they work. But I don't like copying for the sake of copying. "Other games do this so we should" is never a good argument by itself to my thinking.

[novacadian]

Some things get copied because they work.

My preference is for the old style wizard as to the PS variant; yet none of my characters are really into magic that much so it is not breaking my heart that they are not present int he PS World.

- Nova

[Rigwyn]

Out of curiousity Nova, what do you mean by "Old style wizards?"

Earlier, you said:  "In the traditions of rpg magic one point makes sense in the way the melee/magic seems to have evolved in PS the other does. Tradition has the onus on the magic user to loose concentration when struck. They are chanting or making mudras. The fighter shakes their head and moves on."

I'm wondering if this is somehow what you mean? 

Also, does this sentiment refer more to mechanics, role play or some fusion of the two?

[novacadian]

Out of curiousity Nova, what do you mean by "Old style wizards?"

Well traditional MU of D&D had multiple balances. Sure, on the battlefield they could give more than they could take. That seems to be the main view plain of PS' attempt at balance. The tradition is mouch more broad in its balance. The wizard was incredibly feeble at lower levels. The different classes of D&D also advanced at different XP allotments and have different level caps for different classes.

The PS approach to combat balance of classes seems very dualistic to me with the end result being more a matter of style of damage delivery than anything else.

Let us also keep in mind something unique to PS which affects that choice too. Generally it is a lot more easier to grind my character in magic than melee. She sits beside me through work shifts when at quiet moments she grinds CW. Grinding melee (except armour sometimes) is not feasable.

Hope my example shows you that someone can advance much quicker in magic more easily. That is counter to how it goes in D&D. MU's level at a slower pace. 

- Nova