Research:Magic.spells

From Discworld MUD Wiki
Revision as of 02:11, 30 January 2011 by 58.110.64.173 (Talk)

Jump to: navigation, search

TM-ranges

As I noticed a while ago, there seems to be a relationship between the average bonus of all methods involved in a spell and the related ma.sp.* skill bonus regarding TM chances. All out of a sudden I started to TM ma.sp.offensive using Nargl'frob's Empyrean Spear after I TMed countless elemental methods involved before. So I thought there was a connection between the methods getting better and finally my ma.sp.offensive starting to TM as well.

It seems roughly to be (average methods bonus) + (spell size) + 20 or perhaps (average methods bonus) + 1.5 (spell size). I conclude from this, that the strength/potency of a spell is determined by the method stages of the spell and a final check against the related ma.sp.* checks if the spell potency is realized.

To check this simplicistic theory I ask all magic users to monitor their ma.sp.* TMs and then kindly check their involved methods bonuses and reached ma.sp.* bonus and then add those numbers in charts like I did mine below.

So what we are looking for:

Saving... You suddenly feel more puissant in the use of offensive magic.

Saving... You realise you are now more able to use offensive magic.

Example given:

Xorphitus:Nargl'frob's Empyrean Spear

ma.sp.of 362 363 363 364 364 366 366 367
ma.me.el.wa 277 278 284 284 284 284 284 285
ma.me.el.ai 294 295 295 296 296 296 296 296
ma.me.el.fi 306 306 306 306 306 306 306 306
ma.me.el.ea 280 283 285 285 285 286 286 286
ma.me.ph.ev 323 323 323 323 323 323 323 330

Surt: 1 single offensive TM to bonus 364 with DKDD (methods bonus unknown)

Mancow: 38 misc TMs to bonus 332 from JPCT (methods unknown)

Poncho: a few misc TMs with JPCT (methods unknown)

>Another Poncho TM! ma.sp.mi tm

misc............ 317 325 -bonus after TM

enchanting - 297 evoking - 295 binding - 310 dancing - 297 banishing - 295

Galina: misc TM with CIPS

misc............ 51 180

conjuring - 85 evoking - 183 wand - 82 dancing - 183


Alternatively this first theory might be falsified by contributed data as well. Then maybe there are fixed TM ranges for all spells. And it is still of interest to determine said ranges, so the contributed data is not wasted.

--Xorphitus 21:59, 25 January 2011 (UTC)


Thalic:Wonker's Wicked Wobble

Spell is cast while wearing a bronze helm, so bonuses are listed statted.

ma.sp.of 361
cr.sm.go 357
ma.me.ph.bi 334
ma.it.he.ro 280
ma.me.ph.en 346

--Thalic 10:03, 26 January 2011 (UTC)


Historical board messages regarding the changes to magic spells and their power


Note #0 by Gruper posted at Sun Sep 12 09:43:00 1999 Title: 'Change to Spell Power'

Bingles,

There has been whining about the uselessness of ma.methods for as long as I can remember. This is what you asked for.

magic.spells.* no longer influences the power of spells. It is now determined by your magic.methods.* bonuses. If you have low ma.me.* and high ma.sp.*, your spells won't be as powerful as you are used to.

We will tweak things a wee bit after we have seen which effects this has.

Gruper

-- Note #0 by Griffin posted at Sun Sep 12 11:49:59 1999 Title: 'Re:#2 Change to Spell Power'

On Sun Sep 12 11:24:43 1999, Erin wrote: > On Sun Sep 12 09:43:00 1999, Gruper wrote: > > Bingles, > > > > There has been whining about the uselessness of ma.methods > > for as long as I can remember. This is what you asked for. > > I never asked for this. Consider this as a whine on how useless > ma.sp.* skills are now.

I rather like this! I expect people to specialise in a few spells and hopefully this will lead to more variety in spell use. I can imagine that it is a bit frustrating for a while for those who have played on the numbers a lot to advance ma.sp. skills extremely high, but in the long run, I think this will mean a major enrichment of playing with magic. I think it also is more logical to do it this way: the better you are at the relevant skills, the better you cast a spell. Yes, very nice.

So I suppose ma.sp.* is now only relevant for spell speed? Our abilities to do stuff will now most probably have changed quite a bit. I suppose we should try to get some idea of how these changes have affected us in order to get this great innovation fine-tuned? My guess is that a bunch of spells will have become less effective now. Let's try to get a good idea the situation before we start complaining? (We'll be able to complain much more effectively once we know exactly what we are up against. ;-) )

Apart from the work on spell speed and now ma.sp.me, I have noticed that a lot of smaller and bigger bugs have been fixed lately. Thanks for investing some time in our guild. Personally, I really appreciate this fresh wind through the musty corridors of Unseen University.

-- Cheers Griffin

Note #0 by Gruper posted at Sun Sep 12 14:17:11 1999 Title: 'Re:#2 Change to Spell Power'

> No offence, but this seems like an overly emotional reaction. > There is probably a lot of people who are going to be awfully > upset that the work they put into raising their ma.sp.* bonuses has > been thrown away in what could seem like a fit of pique.

Sorry, "this is what you asked for" was a bit harshly worded; this change wasn't made to hurt people. We'll go on tweaking things until we reach a solution that seems at least hafway sane. We are now back somewhere between pre change and nastiest Post Change(tm) weights for the different skills.

Gruper

Note #0 by Gruper posted at Sun Sep 12 18:19:05 1999 Title: 'Re:#1 Change in the conception of magic (long)'

Bingles,

I'll just say it again, for luck: we'll tweak stuff until we have reached a nice solution; do not run - we are your friends. Give it a few days.

> This change makes most wizards casting abilities > more or less equal.

Because wizards have the same ma.methods bonuses but vastly different ma.spells? I don't know if this is true or not, but it sounds rather strange. Concerning the "Discworld flavour of magic", i.e. that ma.sp determining power should be more true to the spirit of Discworld... I'll just say that I disagree. Please read Woddeley's Occult Primer for more information about the different skills.

Your most valid point, as I see it, is that I have suddenly turned your world upside down by changing the rules of the game. You have "wasted" zillions of xp on skills that are now a lot less useful than they used to be. This wasn't a nice thing to do. (This is my main reason for not removing casting from scrolls by non-wizards, by the way.)

There has been many changes the last week. When we see the effect of these changes we can start tweaking the individual spells. In the end I hope almost everyone will be happy.

Oh - rants along the lines of "this sux" are bad, complaints like "I used to be able to get thirteen fire bunnies, but now I only manage four" are good. Same thing with casting times: "They're all too slow!" is bad, "TPA now takes 32 seconds, more than twice as long as it used to take with my ma.sp.de at X. This makes it had to use in combat" is good. Gruper -- Troupe of Jugglers, Man Flying Kite, Frowning Emperor


Note #0 by Gruper posted at Fri Sep 17 15:03:43 1999 Title: 'Grodor och andra djur'

[cc witches]

Bingles,

I haven't seen any (valid and convincing) complaints about things that could be considered "my fault", so the tweaking of spell power/efficiency/wotever is over now.

We'll keep looking at casting times for a while. Input is still appreciated.

Gruper --