Suggestion: Different spells have different armor requirements
-
So I was recently watching one of the Twitch streams and realized that you can only cast spells while wearing light armor. While I totally agree this makes sense as far as casting traditional mage-type spells (fireballs and such), I would maybe consider making some smaller spells/cantrips accessible at the medium armor level. By smaller spells I means things similar in nature to the "signs" used in the Witcher games and that sort of thing. Or, as an alternative solution, make all spells accessible at all armor classes but make the mana requirements go up a lot for each piece of medium/heavy armor equipped.
Thoughts, anyone?
-
@Recoil
I have no thoughts on this subject, but right now even in light armor you get considerable mana cost penalties. Clothes are pretty much the only option if you wanna be a mage and if you need to be a bit tankier, there's a self buff called mage armor.
-
i just hate the idea that this is a sandbox game and we wont have any paladin or death knight style 'classes'. i dont want to see all magic happening from light armor nor do i want to see all melee happening with heavy.
there should be some spells that can be used with any armor (small damage, hex, debuff, etc style) and there should be some melee attacks that can be used with light armor.
but we haven't seen all 1200 abilities so it's hard to say how the 'full vision' will work out. and without any Spotlight, we will just complain based on what we've personally seen.
-
@Jetah said in Suggestion: Different spells have different armor requirements:
i just hate the idea that this is a sandbox game and we wont have any paladin or death knight style 'classes'. i dont want to see all magic happening from light armor nor do i want to see all melee happening with heavy.
there should be some spells that can be used with any armor (small damage, hex, debuff, etc style) and there should be some melee attacks that can be used with light armor.
but we haven't seen all 1200 abilities so it's hard to say how the 'full vision' will work out. and without any Spotlight, we will just complain based on what we've personally seen.
Same it's one of the things I love about eso I can make a heavy armour stamina sorcerer who dives in and aoe electrics everywhere and it will be just as viable as a ranged mage in cloth
-
@Jetah devs stated there WILL be paladin-like classes (for example Restoration school spells will be castable in plate), however mana costs will probably be big. Also you CAN melee in light armour (with mage armour etc.), so what´s the big deal.
There´s already topic about "why cant i be glass cannon in full plate with no downside?
- Glass cannon in full plate and shield is no longer glass, only tanky cannon.
- If wearing heavier armour would affect spell damage, you would suck as mage; if it would affect cd, you would have to manage to nuke enemy down with combo, if not, you would suck as mage; if it would give you huge malus on mana cost, you wouldn´t last very long - you would suck as mage.
Balance point of view - you´re either Tank, DPS or anything between, but not both. Everyone can use any ability and any talent, so only way to further balance is restriction via armour. Same with shields (no offensive spells with shields).
-
@asspirin said in Suggestion: Different spells have different armor requirements:
@Jetah devs stated there WILL be paladin-like classes (for example Restoration school spells will be castable in plate), however mana costs will probably be big. Also you CAN melee in light armour (with mage armour etc.), so what´s the big deal.
There´s already topic about "why cant i be glass cannon in full plate with no downside?
- Glass cannon in full plate and shield is no longer glass, only tanky cannon.
- If wearing heavier armour would affect spell damage, you would suck as mage; if it would affect cd, you would have to manage to nuke enemy down with combo, if not, you would suck as mage; if it would give you huge malus on mana cost, you wouldn´t last very long - you would suck as mage.
Balance point of view - you´re either Tank, DPS or anything between, but not both. Everyone can use any ability and any talent, so only way to further balance is restriction via armour. Same with shields (no offensive spells with shields).
So, the simple way to make it so glass cannons are not glass tanks is to make it so most your damage mitigation comes from skills not armour,
yes you will be slightly more tanky using full plate but maybe you will lose mana regeneration or spell crit chance but tanky armour has spell stun chance and health regeneration for exampleAllowing more play styles not everyone wants 3 set ways to play the game
That's the big deal, restriction imo is not the best way to balance things, making all choices hard to pick from and viable is the more difficult way ,yeah but it's far more rewarding from a player build perspective, I love making weird builds I do it in d2 /3 in eso even did it in guardians of the middle earth. I personally try not to follow the meta
It's way more fun to 1v1 and smash someone with a weird build then it is to be just a glass cannon or just a tank so on
-
@Xzoviac said in Suggestion: Different spells have different armor requirements:
Allowing more play styles not everyone wants 3 set ways to play the game
This ^^^ is my point. Fractured prides itself on being dynamic, which is why I think it'd be cool to allow all armor classes to cast spells. In order to balance it certain costs would have to be enacted, such as increased mana cost or lower spell strength rewarding those at lower armor levels with better spellcasting while not entirely prohibiting someone with heavy or medium armor from doing so altogether.
-
There are spells which not require a certain armor, you just can't get every spell with hide/plate, don't see any problem here. Since we haven't seen many skills/spells yet and we had some of them castable in hide armor in the last test already.
-
If it was released with the current system i can all but garentee that 60-70% of people would run around with light armour, so they can cast spells & the other 25-30% would run heavy but only to compliment friends, tank & rush other players. (the remaining % would be people who dont follow the meta)
The same goes for stats, if there is no reset system, the same % of people would put their all their stats into whatever gives the most versitility & dmg while using abilities that keep them safe, such as teleport, heal, slows, stuns, etc.
Normally people would do a full magic or full archer build etc, but if you cant change stats, expect people to do builds that allow them to use almost everything.You can just look at past games games to see player behavior, its not like it will have a massivly different effect when the core elements are the same.
-
@Xzoviac said in Suggestion: Different spells have different armor requirements:
Allowing more play styles not everyone wants 3 set ways to play the game
One of my favorite all time magic builds is the Battle Mage from Dragon Age: origins
Tanky & can cast a number of spells (with reduced mana re-gen & efficentcy)
But great for a secondary tank option
-
@asspirin said in Suggestion: Different spells have different armor requirements:
@Jetah devs stated there WILL be paladin-like classes (for example Restoration school spells will be castable in plate), however mana costs will probably be big. Also you CAN melee in light armour (with mage armour etc.), so what´s the big deal.
There´s already topic about "why cant i be glass cannon in full plate with no downside?
- Glass cannon in full plate and shield is no longer glass, only tanky cannon.
- If wearing heavier armour would affect spell damage, you would suck as mage; if it would affect cd, you would have to manage to nuke enemy down with combo, if not, you would suck as mage; if it would give you huge malus on mana cost, you wouldn´t last very long - you would suck as mage.
Balance point of view - you´re either Tank, DPS or anything between, but not both. Everyone can use any ability and any talent, so only way to further balance is restriction via armour. Same with shields (no offensive spells with shields).
paladins also have offensive spells too! just because you can wear plate and heal doesn't mean you're a paladin.
i want the option to build my character however i want, which might be a mage in plate. or a hybrid melee-caster or pure something.i love the caster tank (think warlock in WoW during Cata) and the melee mage (think Death Knight also in WoW). with the current system the DK wont exist because 'no casting in plate'. it might be possible to have a caster that drains life and has a type of castable armor (which is ironic that plate casters can't cast a spell to grant them some bonus) which slightly turns the playstyle from range caster to mid range caster to maybe front line cast-tank.
-
@Xzoviac I understand you, I hate meta and also favour weird builds, but as i understand it armour is the only way to show you what you can expect from enemy.
It's way more fun to 1v1 and smash someone with a weird build then it is to be just a glass cannon or just a tank so on
In DII i had Leap attack barbarian
foes always expected you to be WW tweaker with shield, seeing you jump on them must have been surprise; or full summon dudu with uber lvl Bear smashing them with two hits - they expected ele or shapeshifted melee 
Not following meta is sometimes way better then being same as others.In DOTA2 you know every character, all their skills, all their CDs and know their role in fight. In Ability draft you can customize your hero with skills from other heroes and suddenly you don´t know what exactly you can expect from enemy - and it´s a huge game changer. Same in Albion online - you see what your enemy has, you know exactly what he can do.
In Fractured everyone can have everything and as the game will feature skins, armour helps to recognise at least "archetype" if nothing better, but you can tell "this guys´s a tank and this one is dps mage, let´s focus him". I wouldnt like to repeat my experience from GUILD WARS 2 where I faced team of 4 Asuras looking basically the same wearing very similar outfit and with names like wwwwwkkkkiiiii
Or even better - imagine if in DOTA2 match everyone had the same character model, lets say Mortred. What would that mean? Initiators would be useless, because they wouldn´t know who to initiate on. Tanks wouldnt probably mind as they would just run forward, but who would DPS focus? Which one shoud be CCed not to get too close?I like it the way it was presented - Heavy is tanky who will probably not harm me from distance, medium armour is faster dps, he will probably sneak or attack from range and this dude in pajamas should be taken down first before he will fry us or heal other dudes. I take it as little bit of light in this chaos.
-
@asspirin said in Suggestion: Different spells have different armor requirements:
@Xzoviac I understand you, I hate meta and also favour weird builds, but as i understand it armour is the only way to show you what you can expect from enemy.
In DOTA2 you know every character, all their skills, all their CDs and know their role in fight. In Ability draft you can customize your hero with skills from other heroes and suddenly you don´t know what exactly you can expect from enemy - and it´s a huge game changer. Same in Albion online - you see what your enemy has, you know exactly what he can do.
In Fractured everyone can have everything and as the game will feature skins, armour helps to recognise at least "archetype" if nothing better, but you can tell "this guys´s a tank and this one is dps mage, let´s focus him". I wouldnt like to repeat my experience from GUILD WARS 2 where I faced team of 4 Asuras looking basically the same wearing very similar outfit and with names like wwwwwkkkkiiiii
Or even better - imagine if in DOTA2 match everyone had the same character model, lets say Mortred. What would that mean? Initiators would be useless, because they wouldn´t know who to initiate on. Tanks wouldnt probably mind as they would just run forward, but who would DPS focus? WWhich one shoudlnt get too close?I like it the way it was presented - Heavy is tanky who will probably not harm me from distance, medium armour is faster dps, he will probably sneak or attack from range and this dude in pajamas should be taken down first before he will fry us or heal other dudes. I take it as little bit of light in this chaos.
Your point is also valid, I suppose you could put that down to recognising player play style and positioning tanks charging in guy being sheepish at back in full plate throwing out nukes then chilling is a potential lock down target but he is still not as much of a threat as pyjama boy.
Tank wizard will likely be
aoe dive in or dots because burst that does not have all skills in burst just wont be that effective but out lasting your enemys could be tank wizards speciality.Most people will cutty cutter and tanks should be easy to smash down if they are not full tanking it with tank skills
I can see your point but I dont know if it would be as bad as you think if skills are balanced correctly
-
I can see your point but I dont know if it would be as bad as you think if skills are balanced correctly
And that´s actually my point - If you go heavy armour (high defence) your offence should suffer for balance purposes.
Melees are ment to be tanks - most of time is spend chasing enemy or aggroing, so damage is inconsistent. But they balance it with high sustain. defence > offence
Melee assassins have ways to remain close to enemy (shadowsteps, invisibility in general, paralyzations) and they need way less time to kill (bigger attack speed, higher crits that also occure more often). offence > defence
Ranged assassins damage is consistent as they can remain stationary to deal damage from afar, but as they go full damage, theyre the most fragile ones. offence >>> defenceTank wizard will likely be
aoe dive in or dots because burst that does not have all skills in burst just wont be that effective but out lasting your enemys could be tank wizards speciality.
Yes, sure, but for balance purposes damage shouldnt be too high so dots would be rather annoying than deadly and aoes woudlnt do much, such character would be more usable as CC. But then it would be just regular warrior tank
Or restoration and buff skills ----> voila, paladin.Most people will cutty cutter and tanks should be easy to smash down if they are not full tanking it with tank skills
The thing is "tank wizard" will be weaker version of wizard and weaker version of tank. Tanks will eventually outlast them and DPSs will out damage them, so they will not contribute to fight much. Such character looks like a Bard to me, but bard at least buffs his teammates. Thinking about it I wouldnt actually mind meeting such character in game as an enemy, it would probably be a free frag in duel
-
I think we should be able to build a "heavy fighter" type of class, that is, a heavy armoured build with a heavy weapon (heavy axe, mace etc.) which should be able to both deal incredible amount of damage and sustain huge amounts of damage. This is not far from reality actually, just consider heavy knights in the medieval eras
However, the downside of this build would be the speed and mobility. It will not be able to catch people easily and there will be no escape possibilities. Long story short, fight or die type of build I would like to see something like that.
-
@Clinion In Fractured armour doesn´t slow you down (be it attack or move speed) and you can deal high damage in heavy armour. However all weapons have same dps (one handed weapon will do more weaker attacks, 2h will do fewer, but stronger) and while 2h weapon will have huge damage if hit connects, you will be in trouble if you miss few times in row.
You have 8 slots for abilities, im sure you can put some gap closers in there. Maybe one two nukes with "slow" or some such CC, why not.
P.S: "Heavy knights" were mainly cavalry and though they could fight dismounted, 15-20kg of armour does slow you down if on foot (and in muddy terrain).
-
Having armor impact your performance with certain play styles makes a lots of sense. There is several ways to accomplish that:
- like you mention, type of armor restricting certain spell / ability usage
- not restrict certain ability usage completely, but make particular abilities a lot more efficient / inefficient depending on type of armor used (that jump for example could have longer / shorter range, depending on lightness of your armor)
- not restrict ability efficiency, but make particular abilities cost a lot more / less mana / stamina depending on type of armor used (that jump could be cheaper in one armor type, while draining you more in different armor type)
- keep same mana / stamina usage, but make particular ability cooldowns different based on what type of armor you are wearing (that jump could have shorter CD if used with one type of armor and longer CD if used while wearing another type of armor)
- ...
There is probably lot more ways to reward / limit particular playstyle deoending on armor type equipped, and incentivize players to use certain armor type for playing with certain decks / schools.
-
keep same mana / stamina usage, but make particular ability cooldowns different based on what type of armor you are wearing (that jump could have shorter CD if used with one type of armor and longer CD if used while wearing another type of armor)
than tank would just do what assains do --> release all the nukes and hope for best, meanwhile go melee (lesser risk in full plate) and wait for CD; this is imo not the way to go
not restrict ability efficiency, but make particular abilities cost a lot more / less mana / stamina depending on type of armor used (that jump could be cheaper in one armor type, while draining you more in different armor type)
would be doable, but would demand huge mana management, healing can be done with bandages + potions however, so mana maluses would have to be huge; in ADaD heavy armour would give spell chance to fail ---> in Fractured it would translate as "reduce spell chance to hit" aka reduce accuracy
that jump for example could have longer / shorter range, depending on lightness of your armor)
EDIT:
yes...or you can just use "
" (02:28) My point is warriors will probably offer same skills as mages even in full plate, and there are no classes ---> mages can use warrior skills too. By voluntary nerfing effect of mage gap closer you basically wrote you´d use weaker version of warrior skill you can use with full potential. Why would you do this ?
but make particular abilities a lot more efficient / inefficient depending on type of armor used
So lower the damage ---> you would be using spells to do some serious damage and then use heavy armour to lower the damage back to medium? Why
-
I think @asspirin has a good grasp on the gameplay balance aspect of this decision. I've seen different takes in games that allow tanks to cast nukes, but imo the only fair one is to reduce damage.
-
@asspirin said in Suggestion: Different spells have different armor requirements:
By voluntary nerfing effect of mage gap closer you basically wrote you´d use weaker version of warrior skill you can use with full potential. Why would you do this ?
No. In fact my point is, warriors should not have long range "jumps", "charges", or any long range gap closers.
So basically, everyone (regardless of "school") can slot a "transportation" skill in skill bar (as long as he has learned it), and then depending on how heavy armor is currently on you, that "transportation" skill, would produce longer or shorter range transport.
If your armor is 5kg then you jump (arbitary numbers) 20 yards, if your armor is 50kg, then you jump 3 yards, if your armor is somewhere in between, you jump appropriately as well.
So basically each skill used, would check many factors, and one of factors would be total armor weight in this case.
So other type of skills would check other factors, depending on what they do.So basically I wouldn't tie an effectiveness of skill purely to "specific school", but to various factors currently tied to character (like weight of equipment currently on him).
Of course this is only one option. In case heavy armor offers "better protection", and does not nerf damage potention, then movement HAS TO be nerfed.
Other options include, nerfing damage potential (without nerfing agro generation on "tanking" skills, so tanks can still hold threat), in that case "heavy armor" can offer better protection, good agro, good movement, but lower damage done.
-- skill "deep wounds" can produce 200 damage and 100 threat
-- skill "deep wounds" can also produce 20 damage and 100 threat, just by using different threat modifier, so base damage of skill can be completely irrelevant for threat generation.Other options is to not nerf anything, but make heavy armor not offer "better protection" overall, only the different kind of protection.
There are other options as well, it just all has to be balanced. Some examples were written in my post.
Those examples are not to be taken out of context, but of course, assumption is that they are used by balancing other stuff around them as well.
