Mana Upkeep - A System of Magic

[NewPie]

The upkeep system is good if there are no mana potions or stuff.

If there would be mana potions it would suck because if a guy would be upkeeping barrier or something ... he could upkeep it infinitely with his mana potions. So this is definately good system if there are no mana potions.

This system is very good for many enchantments but if somebody wants some kind of permanency or stuff ... there could be separate spells for fortifying upkeeped spells (for example you and your friend could submit your mana to the barrier by casting fortifying spells at it)

bah ... not my day ... flare me if that post sucked ... cya

[Davis]

To get an idea of how this might work, play a mage in Arcanum. You can hold a number of spells based on one of your attributes that I can\'t remember right now, and each spell drains your mana per second, like said here. I think it worked out very well.

[Xanaroth]

you can do by mana/per sec or so, but that would make a high lvl mage an uber god!

Then he could do 2  or 3 shield spells, making him almost immune to melee, distance and spell attacks. and then he could just run into a battle, and in the middle launch giant attacks like blizzard storm and meteor showers and decay clouds. He would be immune for it cause he is the caster, and if he aint the shield spells will guard him.
Then he starts drinking mana potion and just wait untill nothing is standing on both feet anymore.

Result of this. he gets no damage, he gets a huge load of items and money for new potions, he gets a enormous ammount of experience for that many dead people, making him even stronger.
The worst is that a lot of people will quit their characters and make a mage themselfs as well, and so melee combat will dissapear.
Then with so many mages the game will become bored, and thus a lot of people will quit the game, leaving only a handfull of people in the game, whom will quit as well after a while when they are all alone.

[Deddarus]

simple enough

dont have mana pots
make max mana dependent on int not magic skill
have enchantments temporarily lower the max mana whilst in effect in a ddition to mana drop

[Wormtail_]

dont have mana pots

Agreed. Mana potions are used soooo often in soooo many games. Take out the mana potions, and you take out sudden bursts of mana for payment of upkeep. Which is what we want. The disadvantage is that mages will have to expend their casting mana more wisely on things like enchantments.

make max mana dependent on int not magic skill

Then we\'ll see incredible amounts of intellegent mages waving big staffs around. Or wands, hands, etc. Perhaps magic skill could play a small role in determining max mana, and intelligence a large factor.

have enchantments temporarily lower the max mana whilst in effect in a ddition to mana drop

Hmm... But what about the mages who don\'t cast enchantments? They will have the uberness of doom, being able to cast several spells at once, having mana come to them by the tens and hundreds.  Perhaps you must cast a certain amount of enchantments to have a greater \"income of mana,\" only if you have such capabilities (intelligence/experience). If you are a very intelligent and experienced mage with no enchantments to pay for, you do not have a very high income. With several enchantments to pay for, you get a higher income, though most of it is spent on paying for upkeep.

[Deddarus]

i dont think u should penalise someone for having higher stats/skill

a more powerfull mage should be just that.. the trick is balancing it

if enchantments (and by enchantments i envision stationary fields of magic.. eg a sector that heals or gives u a str increase while u r inside its area) were balanced enough then mages not using them wouldnt have an advantage

it should be that the choice between enchantments or no enchantments is a purely tactical decision ... you can set up a defensive/enhancing field but it will mean you cant cast as powerfull spells or as many spells without charging up a bit

eg

Mage 1 goes to attack Mage 2
mage 2 sets up an enchantment field in which he is protected from poison
mage 1 then wouldnt be able to harm mage 2 with poison spells but can cast his most powerfull spells that arent poison based
mage 2 however cannot cast his most powerfull spells

result.. mage 2 has traded the use of his most powerfull spells for the protective benfit of his enchantment... as he maintains the enchantment he will be able to cast fewer and fewer spells.. forcing him to eventually come out of his lil protective bubble and fight like a man

[druke]

Originally posted by Deddarus


make max mana dependent on int not magic skill

skill should determine mana cost, and fizzle rate(there will be one) , int determines mana count

[Wormtail_]

I envision an enchantment as either a stationary or mobile magical beneficial aura. Something like a door that prevents unwanted tresspassers from entering, or a speeding bubble that gives faster transportation. The enchantment does not have to remain stationary, but it will cost more if mobile.

However, if a mage gets an extremely high mana income, they will be able to cast powerful spells without stop. There must be a way to limit that, such as a percentage of there max. mana. For every enchantment, perhaps, the income is raised by a small percentage, but in no way guarantees the raise counteracts the upkeep cost of the enchantment.

Also, as a mage maintains an enchantment, the maximum power of his spells is weakened, perhaps, not the actual spell itself. For example, a fireball may lose some of its power and heat when an enchantment is casted, instead of the mage losing the spell completely. For as long as the enchantment is maintained, anyway.

[druke]

they have a system of spell fatigue implemted in the game, its self explanitory

[Skizzik]

In the example of a mage casting 3 shields and being invulnerable, there\'s something very wrong. A shield should never prevent ALL damage of a certain type, especially not a common type like physical, magical or ranged. A shield could prevent an percentage of the total damage done. This percentage could be based on the lvl of the spell, skill lvl, mana put into it, a combination of these factors or something completely else. My points is that 100% protection is not balanced, in no way.

[Xanaroth]

Mana ammount shouldn\'t be done by lvl in intelligence or so, because some mages will only use charisma, or only intelligence or only will.

I myself am a mage, but i have my INT as low as possible, because i know i wont be using those ways. If you then make mana rely on INT, i would still have to raise my int, altough i would do nothing with it. That would also happen with other mages that concentrate on only a few ways, and not all.

Mana ammount should be done by charisma + will + intelligence so that a mage focussed on 1 way, would still be able to have as much mana as a mage that doesn\'t focus and goes for all three ways.

[Xanaroth]

Originally posted by Skizzik
In the example of a mage casting 3 shields and being invulnerable, there\'s something very wrong. A shield should never prevent ALL damage of a certain type, especially not a common type like physical, magical or ranged. A shield could prevent an percentage of the total damage done. This percentage could be based on the lvl of the spell, skill lvl, mana put into it, a combination of these factors or something completely else. My points is that 100% protection is not balanced, in no way.

i know that a shield wont reflect all damage, But shield 1 takes damage, some damage comes trough.

Then shield 2 takes damage, even less damage comes trough,

Shield 3 takes last damage, mage has nothing to worry about.

And that will happen when mana is lowered with time. I am sure i will do that, and then i will seek very strong monsters to lvl up my skills tremendously fast.

While if mana and time are set at the forhand, the shield will collapse after a while, either when time is over or when to much damage is taken, and then the mage has to recast, taking some time and thus giving other a opportunity to do a huge ammount of damage fast with melee or with strong spells, since a mage usually doesn\'t have heavy armor or so.
That way the game will be balanced more.

And mana potions should NOT be banished, unless healing spells and potions are banished as well.
A mage relies on mana, if you take that away you should take healing away as well, because that is what a strong knight relies on.
If you do one thing, also do the other else you will get power unbalanced.

[elscouta]

This is not how shield should behave. For example if a shield take 30% of damage, this means 70% damage pass. So damage who are not absorbed by the three shields is 70%*70%*70%=34%. Kinda more than the 10% that would have being infliged with your system.

About mana max, according to cvs (not completely accurate but still ...), mana max will depend in equal proportions of the three magic stats

[Deddarus]

xanaroth... with no mana pots mages r forced to use their magic tactically... i dont see a problem with this.. with mana pots all it takes is for 1 person to obtain a stack of em and (even without enchantments) they will own everyone (with a large supply of mana pots they could cast the most deadly spell over and over and over)

[Olig]

Although it would take time for the mage to bring out a mana potion and drink it, that doesnt mean he cant use a paralize spell that sucks away all his mana, drink the potion right in front of the paralized, then cast big uber fire ball that drains his mana again. But he\'s fine because he has more potions. That would normally wear somebody out or fatigue them to drain themselves so quickly. Nay to potions! If you\'re worn out, take to the words of Saddam Hussien \"Hey, relax! You need a rest guy!\"