Alternative spellbooks for a new variant

[vilhazarog]

Phantasmal Transfer is weird. You make it sound like you cast it at yourself, and then specify who to transfer your enchantments to. Why not just cast it at your opponent, and your enchantments land on your target? And what if your target already has an incompatible enchantment, does this cancel the entire effect or only the incompatible enchantments? I assume this transfers enchantments recieved on the same round Phantasmal Transfer was cast, yes, it wouldn't make sense otherwise, nevermind.

[Slartucker]

Hypnosis:
It seems like this should use the caster's previous gestures regardless of who it hits. (That allows it to have a potentially interesting, DSF-like defensive use if you plan for it, but situationally that could still suck.)

Despair:
I really, really, really don't like this. This is a 5-gesture FOD. I realize that there is no paralysis, and I realize that this cancels like a disruption rather than not even being counterable. However, this spell means if you make one wrong move at 15 life, it's instantly game over! That is an NPE (Negative Play Experience). Either you will almost never get the spell off, in which case it's just an ominous and uninteresting way of getting soft control over your opponent's spellflow, or you will sometimes get it off, which makes it a big NPE.
I would be happier if it were 6 gestures.

Phantasmal Transfer:
If the caster is always affected but the caster gets to choose the other entity who is affected, wouldn't it make more sense to target the spell (and hence counterspells) at that target?

I guess my main comment is that win-or-nothing effects are really not enjoyable elements of games, in general. They have to be applicable only in extremely isolated conditions, or else they make the game less interesting, and in every game I can think of they end up being either useless or broken. Taliesin, remember that you are not balancing this spellbook just for use by master warlocks against other master warlocks. I can see 1700 elo players getting frustrated and calling the Illusionist "broken" because they don't think about spellflow in a way that allows them to defend Despair or Maze of Mirrors well. Despair may be balanced but it's an NPE.

To be perfectly honest, I would rather avoid instant kill/cripple effects entirely for our initial spellbooks. We can add them in later once we figure out how the balance works with these. But they make things much harder to balance in the first place. Having a class that relies entirely on them to win sounds like bad news to me as well, and I can see matchups being decided in advance based on whether the other mage's spells let him defend easily or at some pains.

[taliesin]

Phantasmal Transfer:

Yes, both of you are probably right that it would make sense to cast it at the other player, who then has to counterspell himself to block it. Mmm, this might make it necessary to make it easier to cast, because you can force through any enchantment simply by counterspelling yourself on the same turn.

Enchantments are swapped over between players, so there shouldn't be any "incompatible" enchantments...

Hypnosis:

Yes, that was worded badly, it should be "the caster used on the preceding round". And yes, I think that does give it interesting defensive potential.

Despair:
Okay. Would six gestures over five turns be acceptable? i.e. ending with a double gesture? Or would you rather have it take six turns? I do think that letting disruptions cancel it weakens the spell hugely, to the point that five gestures is reasonable; there are more disruptions than counterspells in all the spellbooks so far, and as spellbooks grow, disruptions come to far outnumber protection spells. It's not a five-gesture FoD; let me look at the other death spells in Warlocks.

FoD: 8 turns, 8 gestures.
Can be blocked only by Magic Mirror or Dispel. 2 ways to stop.

Poison: 6 turns, 6 gestures.
Can be blocked by Magic Mirror, Dispel Magic, Counterspell, Remove Enchantment. Can be removed with difficulty in subsequent turns by Dispel Magic and Remove Enchantment. 4 ways to stop, 2 ways on subsequent turns.
Disease: 6 turns, 7 gestures, 2 disruptions incorporated.
As Poison, but DFPW also stops it. 5 ways to stop, 3 ways on subsequent turns.
Despair: 5 turns, 5/6 gestures.
Can be blocked by Magic Mirror, Dispel Magic, Counterspell, Remove Enchantment, Fear, Charm Person, Charm Monster, Amnesia, Maladroit, Paralysis. 10 ways to stop.

I'd say it's weaker than Poison, and very much weaker if extended to six turns.

Another way round it would be to extend the spell to seven turns, but make it override other disruptions (and possibly incorporate a subspell or two so it's not too easy to counter, as Poison tends to be).

I can see 1700 elo players getting frustrated and calling the Illusionist "broken" because they don't think about spellflow in a way that allows them to defend Despair or Maze of Mirrors well. Despair may be balanced but it's an NPE.

Maze Of Mirrors isn't a problem if you've got a Remove Enchantment equivalent. I really can't see someone playing the benchmark wizard having any trouble there.

Do you think Permanency is a NPE? For beginning Warlocks, I think it fulfills all your criteria for an NPE until you learn how to defend it. From a particularly devastating disruption, it takes just three turns to cast, and then you have to protect yourself after that for three turns in a row; and if you're careless it kills you, instead of making you surrender.

In fact, most beginning warlocks seem to die very quickly and easily to very defensible things, like not doing anything to stop FoD, or not shielding against monsters, or not knowing how to stop Disease. But when you know how to defend against these things, none of them are NPEs. And I don't think a mid-level warlock would necessarily find Despair an NPE, if only because he has so many options for dealing with it when he spots BRB. But then, play-testing is needed to bring that out.

To be perfectly honest, I would rather avoid instant kill/cripple effects entirely for our initial spellbooks. We can add them in later once we figure out how the balance works with these. But they make things much harder to balance in the first place. Having a class that relies entirely on them to win sounds like bad news to me as well, and I can see matchups being decided in advance based on whether the other mage's spells let him defend easily or at some pains.

Well, okay. I'll shelve Despair for now. Certainly FoD seems hugely powerful in translation and needs some work... the old FoD had up to two gestures shared with another spell (DFPW), and could dummy twice, once into WPP and once into WPFD.

This FoD however shares three gestures (allowing the casting of the major defensive spell Remove Enchantment on the third) and dummies into Counterspell, Cause Light and Summon Goblin. Admittedly there's going to be no paralysis to ram things home with, but it might be a little too powerful.

I suggest maybe:
OHOBRRRH
which allows dummying into Amnesia, Cause Light and Summon Goblin, but doesn't significantly overlap with any other spell.

-----

I'll think up a Despair replacement later. Anyone who's got any suggestions, feel free to chip in.]

And I copied and pasted from the first description and forgot to update Summon Shadow, which should behave as a physical damage block in version 2 as I described earlier...

[vilhazarog]

taliesin said:

Phantasmal Transfer:

Enchantments are swapped over between players, so there shouldn't be any "incompatible" enchantments...

Well, I meant enchantments that cancel each other. If A casts Mala at himself and Charm at B, and B casts Phantasmal Transfer at A, what happens? A can't have Mala and Charm at the same time, so I assume that the transfer takes place and then the enchantments cancel each other, yes?

[Slartucker]

Another thing that occurs to me: "Despair" seems a little out of character for an illusionist. What do you think about, say, "Nightmare"?

taliesin said:

It's not a five-gesture FoD; let me look at the other death spells in Warlocks.

But we don't have all those defenses available. Even the benchmark warlock is missing many of them, and we CANNOT assume that every class will have them. The point of the benchmark warlock is to compare general balance, not absolute balance of whether or not defense is possible. If even one class has a craptastic defense against an instant win spell, that spell is too powerful!

Despair: 5 turns, 5/6 gestures.
Can be blocked by Magic Mirror, Dispel Magic, Counterspell, Remove Enchantment, Fear, Charm Person, Charm Monster, Amnesia, Maladroit, Paralysis. 10 ways to stop.

Again, most of those spells do not even exist in the same world that Despair does... this list is spurious.

I'd say it's weaker than Poison, and very much weaker if extended to six turns.

The problem is that Poison is exceedingly rarely cast. If Poison was easy to dummy into and out of (it's not) and was a much more common attack, you bet your bottom that weaker players would whine and complain about it. And that's absolutely part of game balance. Strong players are going to find the best strategies and defend against them no matter how we implement them. It's much more important to make the game balanced and fun for people who don't do that. Additionally, that tends to make the game more fun for better players, who tend to have more possibilities to consider as a result.

Maze Of Mirrors isn't a problem if you've got a Remove Enchantment equivalent. I really can't see someone playing the benchmark wizard having any trouble there.

Define "isn't a problem." Yes, it's removable, but it's still powerful. Blindness would be a LOT better in RBW if it forced you to remove it manually, rather than just waiting 3 turns. I just think that's awfully powerful for a spell of that length.

Do you think Permanency is a NPE? For beginning Warlocks, I think it fulfills all your criteria for an NPE until you learn how to defend it. From a particularly devastating disruption, it takes just three turns to cast, and then you have to protect yourself after that for three turns in a row; and if you're careless it kills you, instead of making you surrender.

Yes, but Warlocks is a game where total beginners are constantly going to fall on their faces. That's a given, and it's one of the main reasons the game isn't more popular (the other being the need to memorize or look up 43 spells). There's really no way to avoid that. I'm more interesting in what will ruin the day of a 1700 player. 1700 players see perm coming and, even if they don't use a good defense, even if they don't know about the PDWP defense, they can at least see it coming and counter it.

That's the other thing. Perm is an instant kill, but it's an instant kill that makes itself *quite* obvious to the victim beforehand, since it involves casting a spell. You can't miss that. It then gives them a few chances to avoid said kill, even for a newbie who defends poorly -- so it is interactive. That's really important, and it's my big problem with para, which is so frequently noninteractive. If in my third game ever of RBW, my opponent hits me with SPFP, then casts perm, I try to defend poorly, and get hit with perm DPP, I'll probably say "wow, that's kinda cool." There are some obvious places where I could have defended better. If in my third game I get hit with FOD, I'll proably say "yuck, that's not cool." And if in my third game I die from a 5 gesture spell, I'll probably say "WTF? This is not balanced." It may actually be very balanced, but that fact is far less obvious than for perm, and the shortness will make it seem worse than FOD even if it's not.

I suggest maybe:
OHOBRRRH

I missed something. Why the heck are we translating FOD already? Why are we translating it at all?

[vilhazarog]

Yaron included it in his MiniWarlock spellbook:

yaron said:

WARLOCK

BBO	Protection
BOO	Counterspell
BRO	Cause Light Wounds
HBBHH	Lightning Bolt
HOO	Amnesia
HRRB	Summon Ogre
OBOBRRRH	Finger of Death
ORHH	Charm Monster
O	Shield
RHB	Charm Person*
ROBO	Remove Enchantment
RRB	Summon Goblin

[taliesin]

vilhazarog said:

Well, I meant enchantments that cancel each other. If A casts Mala at himself and Charm at B, and B casts Phantasmal Transfer at A, what happens? A can't have Mala and Charm at the same time, so I assume that the transfer takes place and then the enchantments cancel each other, yes?

No. The enchantments "swap".

Next turn, A should be Maladroit and B should be Charmed (by A).
Phantasmal Transfer is cast.
Next turn, A is Charmed (by A) and B is Maladroit.

It's a swap of effects. And, uh, crap, I forgot to mention the swap in the second draft, didn't I?

[taliesin]

admin said:

Another thing that occurs to me: "Despair" seems a little out of character for an illusionist. What do you think about, say, "Nightmare"?

Sounds like a useful spell. Maybe a different spell. Let me think about that.

taliesin said:

It's not a five-gesture FoD; let me look at the other death spells in Warlocks.

But we don't have all those defenses available. Even the benchmark warlock is missing many of them, and we CANNOT assume that every class will have them.[/quote]

Well, actually, the benchmark warlock here has five defences available. Out of twelve spells, five of them are defences. That's not bad, given that the FoD in the benchmark spellbook has no counters available whatsoever...

admin said:

Define "isn't a problem." Yes, it's removable, but it's still powerful. Blindness would be a LOT better in RBW if it forced you to remove it manually, rather than just waiting 3 turns. I just think that's awfully powerful for a spell of that length.

The last two turns are the same gesture, repeated. If you start Remove Enchantment when it hits you, you only have three turns to worry about, and at present it's more like Blindness than Invis: i.e. monsters still attack the caster, and the spells that lead off it are pretty crap (given Despair's been squashed) - much more crap than Blindness so far, and you've got a casting cost heavier than Invis. It may need to be rebalanced later if we come up with a number of great spells starting with B, but right now, it's not so powerful.

I suggest maybe:
OHOBRRRH

I missed something. Why the heck are we translating FOD already? Why are we translating it at all?[/quote]

'Cos Yaron's default spellbook had a stripped down Warlock with it.

[taliesin]

Illusionist, version 2.1, mistakes removed:

(Various spell strings have been switched round to balance the gestures more fully).

RO: Sleight Of Hand:
Enchantment.
If cast on a wizard, next turn that wizard chooses one of his hands and submits a third gesture which will be shown to other wizards in place of the gesture actually made on that hand.
This spell has no effect on monsters.

RBB: Summon Shadow:
Summoning.
Summons a 1-health monster susceptible only to magical damage and incapable of attack. If there is a Shadow present, all stabs or monster attacks are diverted to it.

RHB: Hypnosis:
Disruption.
If cast on a wizard, next turn that wizard may only choose from the gestures his opponent used on the preceding round.
If cast on a monster, the monster attacks the target of the caster's choice that round.
(Too many useful O spells, R spells were weaker.)

OBB: Terror:
Disruption.
If cast on a wizard, next turn that wizard may make only the gestures O or H on either hand.
If cast on a monster, the monster does not attack this turn.

OHB: Fade:
Enchantment.
If cast on a wizard, next turn that wizard is hidden from view; his gestures cannot be seen and monsters cannot target him.
If cast on a monster, all other spells aimed at the monster that turn fail.

BOH: Searing Light:
Damage.
This spell inflicts one damage on all entities present but for the caster.

BRRH: Psychosomnia:
Enchantment.
While this inflicts three damage, it counts as an enchantment spell and not a direct damage spell, and can be cancelled by spells which target enchantments.

BROBB: Nightmare:
Disruption.
If cast on a wizard, for the next three turns that wizard may make only the gestures O or H on either hand.
If cast on a monster, the monster does not attack and dies this turn.
(Slarty: better? I think this is maybe now on the weak side. It's basically an extended Terror. It'll do quite a number on someone's spellflow, but is easily blocked and not in itself terribly lethal).

BBOr: Phantasmal Transfer:
Enchantment.
This spell swaps all the enchantments present on the caster this turn with all the enchantments present on the target. This would include disruptions as well as permanent enchantments. Countering the target negates this spell.

HH: Lethargy:
Disruption.
If cast on a wizard, next turn that wizard cannot stab.
If cast on a monster, the monster cannot attack that turn.
This disruption cancels with other disruptions.
(Strengthened slightly, I think, allowing more options on the other hand).

HOOR: Mirror Image:
Protection.
If cast on a wizard or monster, the wizard or monster is immune to the next three spells cast on him by other wizards or physical attacks made against him; if several attacks are directed at the wizard or monster on the turn all the Mirror Images are destroyed, they're dealt with in process order (i.e. if disruptions are handled before damage spells, they'll use up the image first).
(Increased to four gestures to cast, since it lasts for three spells of any stripe).

HRObb: Maze Of Mirrors.
Permanent Enchantment.
If cast on a wizard, the wizard sees his opponent's spellflow as an exact mirror of his own from the next turn onwards, and all spells he casts are targetted at himself.
If cast on a monster, the monster dies from magical overload without attacking.

Thoughts?

Taliesin[/quote]