Do Spellcasters Get a Chance At 'Feats' Too?

[IJBall]

In thinking this issue over, I really think they should - lest melee-fighters get an unfair advantage having 'Feats' whereas spellcasters don't.

But there are just certain times, every so often, when you just need a spell to work, monster's 'Save' throw be damned! It could be an offensive spell like Smite, or even a somewhat defensive spell like Dancing Lights/Sparkling Wonder, but you just really need it to work, dang it!!

I don't know what the mechanism would be for 'Spell Feats' either - maybe you need Level 10 in one of the Magicks to get 'Feats' in Tier One spells, Level 20 for 'Feats' in Tier Two spells, and Level 30 for Tier Three spell 'Feats'. Or maybe it could be tied in to Concentration (CON). Or maybe both. I dunno...

All I do know is that it seems a little bit unfair/biased towards melee-fighters if only they get 'Feat' opportunities, and spellcasters are just SOoL!

Thoughts?...

[MyGameCompany]

I could see a feat where the occasional fireball is so well placed that it does double the damage - like hitting some ultra vulnerable spot.

[IJBall]

I could see a feat where the occasional fireball is so well placed that it does double the damage - like hitting some ultra vulnerable spot.

Actually, my conception of how spell 'Feats' would work isn't even about increasing the damage - it's just that when using a Spell 'Feat', the mobs' "Save" roll would be an automatic fail.

The problem with 'higher level' mobs is that they are so good at either 'Saving vs. Elements' or 'Saving vs. Magick' that even mana-intensive Tier Three spells fail >50% of the time.

I just think it would be good to know that when that Taurux is just one more hit from death, but you are down to just one final spell-casting based on your remaining available MPs, you could unleash a guaranteed Spell (e.g. Smite, or Deep Freeze) 'Feat' that you know was going to work, and not be 'nulled' out by a successful 'Save' from that Taurux.

Or, conversely, when you are one hit away from death because your HPs are <10, that you could cast a Dancing Lights/Sparkling Wonder spell 'Feat' that you just knew was going to be successful in getting that Taurux to run away before killing you, thus saving your bacon.

And I don't know the details about how this should work (e.g. Level required for casting 'Feats', how many turns between Feats, etc.).

It just seems like to me, if melee-fighters get 'em, then spellcasters should get some 'Feat' capability too.

[CrazyBernie]

I agree, and disagree at the same time.

Mages are the ultimate in "hit and run" combat. They can unleash a furious storm of death... then run away, and rest up until their mana replenishes. This gives them free unlimited ammo. Rangers don't have that ability, and with the new weapon/armor durability feature, melee fighters aren't really going to have that luxury anymore either. Therefore statistically speaking, melee characters are always going to be at a disadvantage. I see the feats has helping to level the playing field by giving melee-types their own "supernatural" abilities.

Now, that's not to say it wouldn't be cool to see casters get the "feat" treatment. What you're describing, I would label "Spell Penetration." Normally it would either be a skill or a feature of the casting skill that would increase the chance of breaking through an enemy's resistances, or further reduce those resistances. As a feat, I would see it being activated and allowing the next offensive spell cast to bypass the enemy's resistance, scoring an automatic hit. Another such feat could be "Maximize Spell" where the amount of damage (or healing) on the next cast be doubled.

Extra coolness aside, I think we should wait to see what kind of overhauling the Caster's get... they may well not need such frivolous extra abilities.

[tungprc]

I'm sure BW will have beta-testers that are pro magic-user. They'll whine at him until he balances them better than last game. I agree with the folks that want magical damage to increase based on intelligence/perception stats and points in Elemental magic. I'm also hoping to see a lot more secret stuff this time. The spot hidden skill was basically useless in the last game. More secret doors that lead to fabulous treasures

[BasiliskWrangler]

I'm sure BW will have beta-testers that are pro magic-user. They'll whine at him until he balances them better than last game. I agree with the folks that want magical damage to increase based on intelligence/perception stats and points in Elemental magic. I'm also hoping to see a lot more secret stuff this time. The spot hidden skill was basically useless in the last game. More secret doors that lead to fabulous treasures

Re: Mage/Healer Feats.... I am torn on this. Specifically, Mages have the ability to power-up their spells based on their Elemental/Divination skill. This is what made me feel like Weapons needed some special feat when those skills were high enough. I don't feel like magick users need any further special ability. I'm sure we will continue to hear both sides of the argument.

Spot Hidden is very valuable in Book 2. Lots and lots of hidden items, and quite a few more traps which are no fun to stumble upon.

[Riggon]

Spot Hidden is very valuable in Book 2. Lots and lots of hidden items, and quite a few more traps which are no fun to stumble upon.

Yes! I love Spot Hidden, it's one of my favorite skills. Don't ask me why, I just think it's really cool. Maybe because it's a skill unique to Eschalon.

[IJBall]

Re: Mage/Healer Feats.... I am torn on this.

Hey, not just Mages! I want Healers to be able to get their 'Feats' on too!!

Specifically, Mages have the ability to power-up their spells based on their Elemental/Divination skill.

Again, for me, the issue isn't really spell "damage" per se, as much as it is the ability to get past monster 'Save' rolls when you truly need it.

The issue really is whether Book II will handle this issue like Book I - in Book I, AFAICT, casting at Higher Levels didn't do anything to mobs' 'Save' rolls: they were just as likely to 'Save' vs. spells cast at higher levels as they were vs. spells cast at lower levels. Obviously, at this point, I don't know if Book II will handle that issue the same way or not. (If not, then the need for magical 'Feats' may be moot...)

But I'm kind of glad I brought this issue up so that the Beta testers can at least consider it whilst 'balancing' the game.

[tungprc]

As long as my mage has the same chance of clearing maps as my paladin the game is balanced. If a sword and shield guy can wipe out a map and only drink a potion or two the whole time, and a mage has to rest 6 times and drink 12 restore mana potions, the game is heavily imbalanced. Both should use different tactics but have the same results. I would think the hardest player to balance would be a sneak-thief. If someone is avoiding combat most of the time, how will they level up quickly enough to make it to end game? Balancing is a tricky business and nobody will ever be perfectly satisfied. You just have to find a happy medium. I think it makes perfect sense for some dungeons to be murder on melee folks and some murder for mages. A healer might have more trouble on the damaging end, but makes up for it in durability. A battle-mage type character will be great, but not as powerful in either school as a purist.

[MyGameCompany]

BW, I'm not overly concerned about mages having feats. I was just throwing out an idea of what a feat might look like for a mage. Personally, I think mages do a lot of ultra-cool stuff as it is. My only complaint would be that some of the spells in Book 1 aren't very visually impressive. For example, a Compress Atmosphere spell would be more satisfying if the enemy clutched their throat momentarily after the blue bubble showed up around them.

And by the way, I finally leveled up my Book 1 mage to the point where mana points regenerated like crazy when sleeping. I think I know the magic combination of skills and attributes now to maximize a future mage character. Perhaps mana adjustments are not necessary, like I first thought.

[silverkitty]

I would think the hardest player to balance would be a sneak-thief. If someone is avoiding combat most of the time, how will they level up quickly enough to make it to end game?

who said anything about leveling up?

http://silverchat.com/~silver/img/eschalon1_garrett.jpg

(too bad I'm not beta testing E2 to make sure this is still a possible path. So I have to trust one of the testers is doing the total sneak route and making sure it's balanced)

[Buckets]

Facsinating Silverkitty! Thanks for sharing. I have to admit I never have thought of sneaking my way through to the end but I think it would be too boring for me. Just knowing it can be done is good enough for me.

[Evnissyen]

Hide in Shadows 7 and Pick Locks 14 enhanced -- with only a pair of gloves -- at level 2?

I suppose it's possible with a glove of pick locks +5 . . . not sure about the Hide In Shadows 7 in addition. Let me see... read a book and gain 3 points... yes, I suppose it's possible.

Nice work.

Anyway...

Spot Hidden is very valuable in Book 2. Lots and lots of hidden items, and quite a few more traps which are no fun to stumble upon.

Now I know which feature I'm going to pump lots of points into from the beginning, at the expense of others, and not know where to stop.

Both should use different tactics but have the same results. I would think the hardest player to balance would be a sneak-thief. If someone is avoiding combat most of the time, how will they level up quickly enough to make it to end game?

I'm hoping we get XP for successfully opening a lock or disarming a trap? I don't remember if that was the case or not in Book I.

[King_ov_Death]

Both should use different tactics but have the same results. I would think the hardest player to balance would be a sneak-thief. If someone is avoiding combat most of the time, how will they level up quickly enough to make it to end game?

I'm hoping we get XP for successfully opening a lock or disarming a trap? I don't remember if that was the case or not in Book I.

I think you got XP when you disarmed a trap, but I don't remember if the same happened with picked locks.

[MyGameCompany]

Yes, you get XP when you pick a lock. I'm playing a ranger/thief right now...