Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well, Stephen saying that suggests we can assume aoe damage breaks stealth. =P That's a whole different discussion in my head, for another time. Personally, I don't think damage should break stealth.
But as Nihimon says, unless they're looking to reveal the stealthed character and then let them wander off to try again, odds are good they will shortly be doing something else to flag themselves. Unless a cantrip can one-shot a stealthed character, and that's just silly =P
So, how's Cover gonna work with these AoEs?
If I see a mage aiming an orange bead at my group, can I leap behind a nearby wall/large tree to escape? I think that would add an interesting dimension to the game, personally.
Oh, and honestly, I do kind of doubt anybody's going to be Stealthing around trying to get hit by fireballs. It requires a lot of good Stealth/bad Perception rolls, and what's the reward? You deal a guy some Reputation damage and now you're going to die.
Surely there are many better ways to grief.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Clipping someone who's stealthed with an AoE is, at best, an accident on both parts, and at worst a deliberate action on the part of the stealthed character.Just doing a drive by on the thread because there's information you don't know that might change this opinion :) .
There will almost certainly be cantrip AoEs that do less damage than Spells, but can be used far more often. So it might be possible to depth charge for Stealthed characters (e.g., "I think there's a Rogue over there, but his Stealth is way too high, someone drop a few AoEs over there"), which would totally be intentional on the part of the caster.
And that seems like something that's at least as likely to happen as Stealth-based characters trying to get in on an AoE to flag the caster.
LOL... I really had a gut laugh at this one.... Magic User unitentionally flags a stealthed bandit, and now is PVP enabled. Dev response, use a less costly (mana wise) AOE spell... the PVP flag is working as intended.
Message to Magic Users w/ AOE Spells: "When in doubt, don't whip it out."
@Stephen Cheney
Can we please get some clarification as to the amount the chaotic / evil / negative Reputation shifts and penalties will be?
These consequences seem to have some here so twisted with fear, some might actually prefer perma-death instead!
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Clipping someone who's stealthed with an AoE is, at best, an accident on both parts, and at worst a deliberate action on the part of the stealthed character.Just doing a drive by on the thread because there's information you don't know that might change this opinion :) .
There will almost certainly be cantrip AoEs that do less damage than Spells, but can be used far more often. So it might be possible to depth charge for Stealthed characters (e.g., "I think there's a Rogue over there, but his Stealth is way too high, someone drop a few AoEs over there"), which would totally be intentional on the part of the caster.
And that seems like something that's at least as likely to happen as Stealth-based characters trying to get in on an AoE to flag the caster.
I don't see any inconsistency with those cantrips breaking stealth and not providing any flags when they hit a stealthed character. After all, there's no way to tell the difference between a hidden PC and a hidden goblin...
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The problem with hitting hidden targets is something that has already been a big problem in WoW. A stealthy character hides and tried to get hit with an unintended AoE so that the game counts them as being attacked, and they can then defend themselves and kill/loot the person who dropped the AoE. The person who dropped the AoE then has their original fight to deal with plus one assassin. And in the end, the assassin suffers no reputation or alignment drop.
I don't think the "friendly-fire" idea is good for MMOs. From the very original D&D, casters had time to measure their attacks, which is impossible in an MMO. Without time to measure attacks, there will be many unintended hits on allies, which will drain healing resources, lose fights, and cause party in fighting, none of which make for fun games. If you want to be fair and realistic about friendly-fire then all attacks should target areas (very small areas for melee attacks) so that all classes need to be careful about where they aim their attacks. Of course that would create huge problems because of lag, but that's already what it will do for AoE attacks.
I'm not a fan of the diminishing return on AoE attacks. If people start using a lot of fireballs to take down other players, then players will respond by getting more items that give magic resistance, or they will start learning evasion. But I don't think it will be a big problem either way. Mostly I think it is just unnecessary complication.
I do have a VERY big problem with the magical turbulence idea. I have a masters degree in physics and I know that waves tend to add to each other, and not just randomly interfere. This is called the principle of superposition. It means that if you have two waves that cross each other, the height at crossing is just that of the two added together. Regardless of what games mechanics are used, no one should try to pass off fantasy as reality, as was done in the blog posting.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't see any inconsistency with those cantrips breaking stealth and not providing any flags when they hit a stealthed character. After all, there's no way to tell the difference between a hidden PC and a hidden goblin...Clipping someone who's stealthed with an AoE is, at best, an accident on both parts, and at worst a deliberate action on the part of the stealthed character.Just doing a drive by on the thread because there's information you don't know that might change this opinion :) .
There will almost certainly be cantrip AoEs that do less damage than Spells, but can be used far more often. So it might be possible to depth charge for Stealthed characters (e.g., "I think there's a Rogue over there, but his Stealth is way too high, someone drop a few AoEs over there"), which would totally be intentional on the part of the caster.
And that seems like something that's at least as likely to happen as Stealth-based characters trying to get in on an AoE to flag the caster.
Especially if those cantrips don't even do damage. I am thinking of something like Faerie Fire.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
...Regardless of what games mechanics are used, no one should try to pass off fantasy as reality, as was done in the blog posting.
So let me get this straight: You would rather your fantasy game environment should disregard realism altogether, according to your last line (quoted), yet a few sentences earlier protested that a proposed fantasy game mechanic is unrealistic?
Would you share which school awarded you a Master's degree? I know a few folks who would like to be able to get away with a similar degree of consistency in their theses.|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
...Regardless of what games mechanics are used, no one should try to pass off fantasy as reality, as was done in the blog posting.So let me get this straight: You would rather your fantasy game environment should disregard realism altogether, according to your last line (quoted), yet a few sentences earlier protested that a proposed fantasy game mechanic is unrealistic?
Would you share which school awarded you a Master's degree? I know a few folks who would like to be able to get away with a similar degree of consistency in their theses.
I can't speak for others, but I'm really not particularly interested in whether or not something is real-world accurate, as long as it's logical and internally consistant.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Well, Stephen saying that suggests we can assume aoe damage breaks stealth. =P That's a whole different discussion in my head, for another time. Personally, I don't think damage should break stealth.
Well even if damage didn't... P&P certainly had it's means of doing so.
It isn't quite at cantrip level and it technically doesn't break stealth, but well a -40 to stealth pretty much is instant reveal in my book|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Well, Stephen saying that suggests we can assume aoe damage breaks stealth. =P That's a whole different discussion in my head, for another time. Personally, I don't think damage should break stealth.
Well even if damage didn't... P&P certainly had it's means of doing so.
It isn't quite at cantrip level and it technically doesn't break stealth, but well a -40 to stealth pretty much is instant reveal in my book
Oh, I'm all for means of being able to counteract stealth. Glitterdust, Invisibility Purge, Detect X, Dust of Appearance, Faery Fire... I just don't think damage should be one of them. At best, I'd think it would force a new stealth check.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Stealthing for Attack Flag and Radial AoEs
1) To the best of my understanding, the flag system represents social structure: a way to incentivize/de-incentivize certain kinds of behavior.
If AOE attacks that touch a stealthed characters triggers the Attacker flag, then there's a very clear incentive to have sneaky-guys willingly place themselves in the path of AOE attacks to game the system, and that doesn't seem to be the kind of behavior you're trying to incentivize. Imbicatus' solution makes sense then: AoE attacks that hit stealthed characters don't trigger the Attacker flag. I still have to be careful about lobbing Ice Storms, but I can't get suckered by a perverse application of the game mechanic.
2) Could another option be be radial effects for AoEs? Just like an M67 grenade a kill radius of 5 meters, and a casualty radius of 15 meters, we might abstract AoEs as having a certain range--e.g. at a radius of .5X full effect, at radius X .5 effect, at radius 1.5 X .25 effect. If you didn't have visible targeting, tab-targeting, or pin-point targeting, AoE attacks would function like indirect massed fires: you could cover a large area, but not pile multiple tubes on a point. Could that be a compromise between allowing for full effects of AoEs without them being a first-strike insta-win? In this scenario, you're in the bushes and pick a target, and while mages can target the area they're going to affect, they can't just auto-pinprick one PC and insta-wipe a group or part of a group.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
@Stephen Cheney
Can we please get some clarification as to the amount the chaotic / evil / negative Reputation shifts and penalties will be?
I suggest you re-read "First, a Bit of Math" from Shot a Man in Reno Just To Watch Him Die. That pretty directly answers your question.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Imbicatus' solution makes sense then: AoE attacks that hit stealthed characters don't trigger the Attacker flag.
Ahem.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Actually, Mbando, your comment about ice storms got me thinking. Stealth aside, how would flagging work if I set down a persistant AOE damage spell like Black Tentacles and someone unaffiliated walked into it?
I'm obviously not Mbando but an argument could be made that the unaffiliated walker wandering into your Black Tenticles should be flagged as their own attacker, since it was their choice to go there. If they die they can issue a bounty upon themselves.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Actually, Mbando, your comment about ice storms got me thinking. Stealth aside, how would flagging work if I set down a persistant AOE damage spell like Black Tentacles and someone unaffiliated walked into it?I'm obviously not Mbando but an argument could be made that the unaffiliated walker wandering into your Black Tenticles should be flagged as their own attacker, since it was their choice to go there. If they die they can issue a bounty upon themselves.
Seems like more of a death curse than a bounty moment. "@#*& ME!" =P
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
... how would flagging work if I set down a persistant AOE damage spell like Black Tentacles and someone unaffiliated walked into it?
Perhaps the simplest solution would be to allow each caster to set a flag that determined whether they would auto-cancel any AoE if it would affect a non-flagged, non-grouped player character.
If they turn that flag off, then they get flagged if they damage someone. Although, I still think my earlier proposal regarding Stealth should still apply.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Another thought that might address the whole Alpha Strike and Magical Turbulence idea is that AoE spells always have a long cast time, during which the ground in the area lights up letting the players there know what's coming. The ability of those characters to move out of the way would create a strong incentive for massed ranged fire to spread out their AoEs in the hopes of catching more enemies.
As above, I still think Stealth needs to be handled as a special case.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The problem revolves around stealthed characters intentionally forcing another character to unwittingly flag themselves by standing where they expect that character to cast an AoE........If the AoE caster is intentionally trying to discover a nearby stealthed character, then they're almost certainly going to do something else to that character once they're no longer stealthed. That's the right time for the flag to apply.
IMO.
These techniques are tried and true baiting techniques used for as long as MMOs have been around. Here are a couple of examples...
In WoW in any PvP area if you were not automatically flagged for PvP, but others were, the flagged toon would follow you around as you did dailies or were grinding/farming loot or XPs and stand directly on top of your kill. You had a tough time looting the corpse without accidentally attacking the other toon, then it was on! (This usually happened when you were farming and had a PvE spec, making you vulnerable in a PvP situation.)
EVE has several other examples, for instance, you are farming with your fleet (either a small fleet or your own numerous accounts with a guard ship present) and a bait ship would try to blend in with a small pirate fleet at a belt, and would lock onto your guard ship. If the guard pilot didn't realize the bait ship was a real player, once again, it was on!
I see the fireball cast into the band of ogres a great way to bait, and flag, the caster. I hate the baiters, but some of them are masters at it! :) Yeah, that was intentional.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Imbicatus' solution makes sense then: AoE attacks that hit stealthed characters don't trigger the Attacker flag.Ahem.
Scratch that, reverse it: Nihimon's solution.
If the person is stealthed, and possibly for a second or so after coming out of it, hitting them with an AoE does not produce the attacker flag (unless you get it already for some other reason). I suggest a second or so after so that someone doesn't get around it by unstealthing as the fireball flies toward them.
Right, and such a delay also covers latency issues. Although the issue there is that sizing the delay for a given latency leaves it open to exploits for those with ultra-low latency, i.e. possibly getting in another AoE without flagging.
I think the same issue could be resolved in a more server-centric manner, by 'time stamping' the actual casting event (time synced up between server/client) which then becomes the relevant moment in time for judging flag issues, i.e. before any player could have potentially reacted to the casting. This results in a delay/latency in applying the flag 'after the fact', but there would be latency in the other approach any ways, and this latency isn't preventing anybody from taking any specific action even if for the brief period of latency the attacker flag hasn't been resolved yet.That was based on your premise of not applying the attacker flag, for ease of discussing the latency/delay issue you raised.
IMHO, not invoking the attacker flag in any manner is not the desired approach, because somebody 'accidentally' hit by an AoE really should be able to fight back without becoming the attacker themself. At minimum, the accidentally hit target should be able to fight back AS IF the caster DOES have the attacker flag (I can't say whether the stealther should be able to see if the attacker has 'accidental attacker' vs 'attacker' flag).
The main concern should be so the caster doesn't automatically suffer chaotic alignment hit for the unwitting action, and if the fight develops such that they kill the stealthed target, and possibly they shouldn't suffer the evil or rep consequences for killing somebody you attacked after gaining attacker flag, if the target fights back but they end up killing them. At the least, I am against the chaotic consequence for the initial attack, and if you happen to kill them in that initial attack evil/low-rep shouldn't apply for that attack itself, even if if you do end up killing them after a fight the evil/low-rep consequences might apply.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Scratch that, reverse it: Nihimon's solution.Imbicatus' solution makes sense then: AoE attacks that hit stealthed characters don't trigger the Attacker flag.Ahem.
i
I missed Nihimon's post when I had posted... Independent design. :)|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It seems to me that un-targeted attacks should only apply an attacker flag if the target is visible to the caster. Getting hit should always remove any stealth, and the Magical Turbulence debuff should bar any new stealth.
I can see what your aim is here, but my issue is an arcane caster now has a free attack that does damage and removes stealth from the target (intended or not). The stealth character has just lost one of their primary offensive and defensive tactics, got damaged in the process and cannot enter stealth again for a while. Seems like a great deal for a mage flinging AoE spells around with no care - all because we are worried about griefing or intentional stealth flagging.
How about leaving the target in stealth, but the mage getting no flags still? If the stealth character is up to no good, he can still perpetrate that but still has to deal with flags in the normal manner and he has to do it with damage already inflicted on him/her. If the stealth character was inadvertently hit...no harm now foul, they can just walk away.
I agree that merely being damaged shouldn't force stealth to drop (much less invisibility!).
Perhaps some specific conditions could do so, but not mere damage itself.
If we want to impose a penalty to actions/skills based on ongoing Damage Over Time like from catching fire,
or even have instantaneous damage force another stealth check at penalty based on damage taken, OK,
but that is very distinct from just forcing stealth to be dropped simply because you took minimal damage.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If you are on fire, you can still remain stealthed? Wow, now that is some level of focus on staying in shadows and moving silently.
But then, there is the huge red circle on the ground, with more than enough time to get out, why would wizards even bother?
I personally couldn't care less about the issues involved with this any more. I don't plan on being a wizard and I don't plan on stealthing in the center of a horde if goblins, in the holes that some wizard comes stumbling along throwing fire balls around randomly.
I'll just lay in wait, let him expend mana and maybe one health on the Gobs, then approach under an "Outlaw Flag" and SAD him and his group if he's not alone. Take his gear / loot and loot the Gobs, and move on.
I'm done with worrying about how other classes do their stuff. As long as bandits get to do what we do, I'm fun with whatever GW decides to do with AOE.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I must say after reading all these posts here, I really felt like I have read this all before, just adding the "AOE" tag to it. Everyone is whining about all the ways people can "abuse the system" and while I agree they are all possible ways to do it, people seam to be all for making this game a PVE carebear world so that they don't have to suffer from their bad choices or players wanting to be their content (as in playing the "bad guy.")
This game was advertised as an open world PVP sandbox MMO. Did everyone read the same ad i did for this? I didn't see PVE care bear, Mommy is here to hold your hand and save you from the "bad man" MMO. Yes, people will hack and find exploits, it happens, that is the world we live in get over it. It you don't like it, find another game or go play sports or something.
Now to the topic of this thread. As bludd (I think) had compared earlier, people fearing the AOE nuke party as much as they fear the assassin's 1 shot ability. The fact is, it all depends on how this is accomplished and what the vision is for their use. In TT, big AOE spells were situational, large room/open area with lots of enemies, time for fireball. Not when your whole party is in the mix, unless it was a do or die time. Include the fighter, it happens hence the high HPs. If the rogue is in there, he can evade (Hopefully LOL) It is called "Taking one for the team." If I can hit/kill 5 bad guys while hitting 1 party member, I did it. You can save the party that way, expecially if those bad guys had high AC but low Reflex saves. (Which is normally the case) Why shouldn't the same apply here. yes there is lag and latency, but again, s~@@ happens. That is where skill and communication comes in. The more you game with the same group of players, the more you learn their style and habits. If you know the rogue loves to rely on their dex/reflex and is always in the way, then he knows the risks. If you know the mage LOVES his new fireball spell, they keep your distance and use ranged attacks. So many people don't want to learn skill and improve their gameplay. They want the game handed to them and don't wanna work for anything.
As for hitting stealthed characters and flags and all that, I am all for no flag and not breaking stealth, maybe require another check but dont break stealth outright. If he didn't know I was there, weather I was there intentionally or not, no one should be punished (other than damage taken) for it. Now if I catch fire or something, then yes that breaks it or atleast give a penalty to the check to remain hidden. A spell or item intended to break stealth (Such as gliterdust or a puch of chalk) then it breaks stealth, but no damage, and still no attacker flag or alignment/rep hit.
One last thing, Magic is ment to be very powerful and something not to be trifled with. In TT this was limited by putting a daily limit on spells. You can only cast x per day ect. That is how mage towers, houseing some of the most powerful mages, were killed and their rule overthrown by peasants. (level 0 NPCs.) If you survive their spells (Sure you would had lost hundreads or thousands, but eventurally they would run out of spells then they were valnerable and defenseless and killed by common folk. The point is that IMHO magic SHOULD be very powerful, but limited for balancing purposes, just as (In other threads) as Assassin SHOULD be allowed and able to 1-2 shot his target as that is what he does. Mages are amung the most powerful beings in existance, but everyone has a weakness. A skilled assassin can kill a target without anyone knowing he was even there. But should he get caught, he is likely to be killed.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
So if Magic Users don't get the attacker flag for dropping an AOE on a stealthed target, what kind of an attack can the rest of us use to not get the attacker flag?
How will the system tell that the stealthed target was unintended?
Stephen Chaney even responded and supported the idea that AOE will trigger the flag, it will take the thief or assassin out of stealth and that was a practical use of the spell. His only recommendation was to use a cantrip spell rather than a fire ball.
With no flag for AOE, all you will do is have everyone running around with a fire ball ready to use, indiscriminately, because there would be no down side to it.
This Dev Blog should have been entitled: The Roof, The roof, The roof is on Fire, don't bring no water let the MF burn!
Sorry about typing, I the iphones
So after thinking about this blog for a while, I came up with something that I feel is a decent solution to at least ONE of these issues. It also fits within the framework of the Pathfinder RPG, so I think it's a good one.
So, instead of targetting reticles on the ground for everyone, how about they only show up for people with Evasion or similar ability types? The entire point behind that is that a rogue or monk is supposed to be agile enough to avoid AoE damage... If having Evasion is limited by the type of armor people wear(i.e. only cloth and light armor wearers) it keeps this feel in the game, gives people who have invested in a skill a REAL advantage against casters(like they're supposed to have) and puts a realistic limit on casters and heavy armor wearers.
This would, perhaps, have to be combined with some kind of 'Dive for Cover' ability similar to what is available to all characters in GW2 - but only for players with Evasion or Improved Evasion. I never did like guys in full plate being able to do that kind of thing. I'm a black belt in jujutsu and a LARPer... I've tried doing rolls and falls in full chain mail. It's MUCH more difficult. I can't imagine trying it in 90 pounds of plate - though the mobility restriction would likely be more of an issue than the weight. Anyhow, tangent.
What do you guys think?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
then have it do no damage to stealth targets but just pop them out. Then after that if you keep dropping AOEs then you get flagged.
To me its the exact same as having a friend run with your evil bandit group to prevent AOEs or to have the other folks accidently hit that guy.
At that point its not about the person choosing to initate an attack and get flagged for it, its about abusing a mechanic because the game cannot tell the difference and using that to freely greif someone without getting flagged for it.
if you are going to attack someone have the decency to accept the consequences and attack them. Dont use game mechanics to trick them so you can grief people without getting flagged.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I have a better solution, and it solves every issue.....
While the magic user is preparing his AOE spell, he double clicks (or shift+ clicks) on the target(s) that he intends to hit, only the ones that fall within the radius of the AOE. No one else is hit, damaged, unstealthed or flagged. If the targets move out of the radius, it missed them. If any move into the radius, but were not targeted, it missed them as well.
This way the Mage will not get any unintended flags. AOE can not be used as a stealth depth charge. Most of all, it still functions as intended in the Dev Blog.
I can see the diminishing returns explanation, so long as it applies to all magic. Meaning that if you have a tightly packed group of characters and say 3 casters all start casting various spells on members of the tightly packed group, say a healing spell, and a Protection spell and another healing spell. Well the diminishing returns should apply here as well. The first heal would go off at full strength, the protection a bit less, and the last heal even less in effectiveness.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Comments:
1. Stealth in AoE: I agree with others for caster not getting attacker flag for characters hidden by stealth in the AoE. What other mechanic do you know of where you get a prize for failing a skill. The character using non-magical stealth is trying not to be noticed. If they are "noticed" by the magic of an AoE spell they have failed in their attempt at stealth, even if the "notice" was unintentional. They should not be rewarded for failing.
2. Invisibility in AoE: Same reasoning for 1 above applies except for the complication of Magic Turbulence. While a character using physical stealth techniques might still be concealed after the AoE, an invisible character might loose invisibility due to Magic Turbulence from the AoE. However, this raises the question of magical interference between other personal spells and on-going AoE spells.
3. AoE as Bursts: I agree with @Mbando that effects diminish from target point of AoE. I also think that AoE should not be able to target characters, only affect physical locations. This would apply to cone AoE.
4. Targets affected in AoE: Just as effect diminishes with distance, I think that number of characters affected should also be limited by the skill tree for the AoE. Someone with Fireball 1 might affect fewer targets (smaller radius?) than someone with Fireball 3. Damage/debuff/DoT would might or might not vary as well. This would also apply to cone AoE.
5. AoE as Debuff/DoT: I think that this makes sense. However, if we can have an AoE debuff like slow I would expect to have AoE buffs like haste. Channeling should also have same mechanics as damaging spells. Would we also have HoT (healing over time)?
6. Magic Turbulence: I think that this is a fair mechanic. However, I would suggest that this only applies to magics of the same type. Two fireballs, one after the other, would be affected. A fireball followed by a lightning bolt would not as they are fire vs. electricity. As a lore mechanic this could easily be tied to the elemental planes.
7. Detecting AoE Spells: As I believe Hobs pointed out, would you be able to tell if an archer was targeting just you in the crowd? I am not in favor of the "red circle" concept. Someone with a spellcraft skill might be able to know that a character was preparing a fireball spell, but not it's target point.
8. AoE as AoE ,not Burst: I think that spells like flame strike which are true area affect spells may need a different mechanic than a burst fireball. Buff/Debuff AoE spells may or may not be point spread. Channeling is assumed to still be burst.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm a big fan of the diminishing returns. To the point of a Magical Turbulence type effect just before and AoE hits the air around the edge of the AoE's effect area should sort of flare up, as though the magic is welling up in the area and about to erupt.
Considering that magical turbulence would be the effect of a sort of magical energy displacement, it would make sense for that to become visually apparent just before the actual act. It would be not unlike that dreadful click just before C4 goes off in your face in so many shooters. If you notice it, it's just enough for you to back up and save at least part of your hide.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Valandur,
I thought the same thing on my first read about magic turbulence, but if your heal is being "ensured" by your deity, it might not be effected in the same way. However, when it comes to balancing, that would give clerical spells a sizable advantage over magic using classes.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
How will the system tell that the stealthed target was unintended?Stephen Chaney even responded and supported the idea that AOE will trigger the flag, it will take the thief or assassin out of stealth and that was a practical use of the spell. His only recommendation was to use a cantrip spell rather than a fire ball.
He didn't say anything about the flag, just put forward a third scenario for consideration. And a valid one. One alternative would be that the caster doesn't get flagged if there was a visible target in the area of effect. That would prevent depth charging, since he would still get flagged for throwing them into empty space looking for things to hit.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
He didn't say anything about the flag, just put forward a third scenario for consideration. And a valid one. One alternative would be that the caster doesn't get flagged if there was a visible target in the area of effect. That would prevent depth charging, since he would still get flagged for throwing them into empty space looking for things to hit.
This solves that flagging situation and the other issues as well:
While the magic user is preparing his AOE spell, he double clicks (or shift+ clicks)to select the targets:
First he selects the target he wishes to make the center, this could be a friendly as well.
Then he selects the other targets that he intends to hit, only the ones that fall within the radius of the AOE.
No one else is hit, damaged, unstealthed or flagged.
If the targets move out of the radius, it missed them.
If any move into the radius, but were not targeted, it missed them as well.
Yes, this does remove some of the friendly fire, but it eliminates the other issues.
This way the Mage will not get any unintended flags. AOE can not be used as a stealth depth charge. Most of all, it still functions as intended in the Dev Blog. A friendly can still call for it to be dropped on him to include more of the enemy. The only differenece is that this won't happen by accident, but by design of the party.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
That makes sense for a lot of the pseudo-AoE spells (X targets, no two of which are more than Y feet apart) of which there are many in pathfinder. It makes less sense for true AoEs (bursts, cones, lines). Not only that, it completely removes the friendly fire from the equation. It doesn't remove some of the friendly fire, it removes all of it, unless the mage screws up and accidentally selects a friendly. Plus, it means hard-capping the number of enemies who can be hit by an AoE.
Edit to add: Not to mention, accurately selecting the targets in a time-sensitive manner would be made more difficult in a tightly packed group of enemies. Exactly the situation an AoE is for.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The more i read the comments raised, the more I feel that the problem lies in the 'anti-griefing' stance more than anything else. All the points are revolving around trying to stop 'griefers' from gaming the system. However, 'griefers' will ALWAYS find a way to game the system with differing levels of success. Id say the real response to it is get some buddies to track him down or throw a bounty/death curse on him. Problem solved.
I had some thoughts to share, then realised that they got hopelessly tangled when factoring in all the flags and possibilities. Going to have to think about it some more before sharing.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That makes sense for a lot of the pseudo-AoE spells (X targets, no two of which are more than Y feet apart) of which there are many in pathfinder. It makes less sense for true AoEs (bursts, cones, lines). Not only that, it completely removes the friendly fire from the equation. It doesn't remove some of the friendly fire, it removes all of it, unless the mage screws up and accidentally selects a friendly. Plus, it means hard-capping the number of enemies who can be hit by an AoE.
Edit to add: Not to mention, accurately selecting the targets in a time-sensitive manner would be made more difficult in a tightly packed group of enemies. Exactly the situation an AoE is for.
Well then, it should just be left the way that it is. Magic Users will just have to take the risk that they hit an unintended target and deal with the consequences of that. End of all of the issues.
As Oberyn said, but i will add to it: many people are trying to perform mental jujitsu just to appease the anti griefing crowd. If they are that worried about griefing, stay away from open world PvP MMOs.
Good job on the Dev Blog GW, keep up the excellent work.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
...Everyone is whining... PVE carebear world so that they don't have to suffer from their bad choices...PVE care bear, Mommy is here to hold your hand and save you from the "bad man" ...
Wouldn't the point have been better made without all the inflammatory descriptors? Does it in any way improve an argument to offend and antagonize the people you ostensibly are trying to convince? No.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
So if Magic Users don't get the attacker flag for dropping an AOE on a stealthed target, what kind of an attack can the rest of us use to not get the attacker flag?
The stealther chose to be there hidden, it is his responsibility to own the consequences. Non-stealthers cannot entrap you with an attacker flag against your will, how is it you think you need that ability?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Wouldn't the point have been better made without all the inflammatory descriptors? Does it in any way improve an argument to offend and antagonize the people you ostensibly are trying to convince? No.
I actually agree Being, and Oberyn had actually said it better. But you should realize that the anti griefing crowd are just a bit too quick to respond to every single issue related to player interaction. Even in this thread, the very first response included the fear of griefing.
Honestly, the Devs have said that griefing is on their radar and they will actively stomp on it when they see it. We should have a little bit of trust in that and see how it works out in the first days of Early Entry.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
So if Magic Users don't get the attacker flag for dropping an AOE on a stealthed target, what kind of an attack can the rest of us use to not get the attacker flag?The stealther chose to be there hidden, it is his responsibility to own the consequences. Non-stealthers cannot entrap you with an attacker flag against your will, how is it you think you need that ability?
I was responding to another person's post, with a bit of sarcasm. I am adopting a new policy of, when I criticize an idea I won't include the "name wrote", and just deal with the issue. This way some people will not get butt hurt when seeing their quote used against their idea.
Personally, anyone can feel free to quote me when you disagree with me. I enjoy the challenge of defending my ideas. If you have convinced me I'm wrong, I'll admit it and push for your idea.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@ Jiminy: Okay, I can buy that Bludd was being sarcastic. I still think that while it is true that we should expect jerks on every side of any conflict, I don't agree a stealthed character has no responsibility for where and when he sneaks. That said it looks like it should work to require the caster to select which targets in the fire zone he intends to hit, the only concern being the time it takes to select them. I should think that time would fill the casting time for the AOE spell.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
6. Magic Turbulence: I think that this is a fair mechanic. However, I would suggest that this only applies to magics of the same type. Two fireballs, one after the other, would be affected. A fireball followed by a lightning bolt would not as they are fire vs. electricity. As a...
Well the issue with this one, stems from the issue that they are trying to address. I suppose it all depends how many and how effective spells are, the differences in shapes etc...
The entire point of magic turbulance as described, was to prevent say 7 mages in a party from simultaniously dropping AoEs to 1 shot a group. This issue obviously is equally bad in the event that it is 5 circles, one of acid, 1 of electricity, 1 of fire, one of cold that hit simultaneously. Now of course if the spells have different shapes to be intentionally difficult to overlap. IE line vs sphere vs short range cone etc... that could greatly lessen the issue as only 1-2 opponents would be in range of all existing shapes at a time.