Twilightpeaks.net
RoE Development => Regent Guide => : DM B March 02, 2009, 06:53:28 PM
-
Realm spells are one item that needs revision; I will work through ALL the spells eventually, but if players need a revision for a key spell sooner (because of bad wording or poor design), they can request it in this thread.
Demagogue is first...
-
Being the Militant Order and all that, we're quite keen to see a reivew of the military bonus spells, particularly those granting attack and defense bonus in some form or another. As mentioned earleir, it's not clear what type of bonuses the different spells grant, and how they stack on a units base defense.
http://roe.twilightpeaks.net/forum/index.php?topic=208.0
-
OK,
Then we have two blocks of spells that will get attention this turn:
1. Spells that affect province lvl and/or prosperity (i.e. Bless land, celestial boon, demagogue etc.)
2. Spells that affect attack/defense and how they interact with base unit stats.
Anything else will have ti wait until turn 63, but do feel free to come up with requests.
-
Smite the Infidel is a bit lacking in detail... ;D
-
Smite the Infidel is a bit lacking in detail... ;D
OOC:
One could think the name alone says a bit. Maybe the infidels get smited, and that’s about that, end of their story ‘ish ?
-
Smite the Infidel is a bit lacking in detail... ;D
OOC:
One could think the name alone says a bit. Maybe the infidels get smited, and that’s about that, end of their story ‘ish ?
"Kills all believers of a god hostile to your own faith." It's pretty clear what the spell does from it's description. The big questions are what gods/temples would be considered 'hostile', and what effect it has on province levels, prosperity, holdings etc.
Another interesting case would be whether this spell is usable if there is a schism within a church.
-
Um, most people in Anuire is polytheistic. Even if they hate a god, they still believe in it...
-
Um, most people in Anuire is polytheistic. Even if they hate a god, they still believe in it...
Exactly. While that was taken from the description blurb in the spell list, if one takes it to its logical conclusion it would kill everybody in a province.
-
Um, most people in Anuire is polytheistic. Even if they hate a god, they still believe in it...
Exactly. While that was taken from the description blurb in the spell list, if one takes it to its logical conclusion it would kill everybody in a province.
Now, there is a backfire result worth documenting for the ages. ;D
-
OK, enough OOC chatter; save it for the Great Beyond.
-
Regarding the Demagogue spell... I don't know if you're open to discussing it a little. I have opened another thread for that purpose.
-
Bjorn can you clarify the changes to Bless the Holy Lands? It is confusing with regards to the prosperity effect.
-
Bjorn can you clarify the changes to Bless the Holy Lands? It is confusing with regards to the prosperity effect.
OOC (jest):
:-)… Yes, there is something about the Tornilen/SM avatar that distracts the attention away from the text. Try reading several times.
-
There are a lot of spells that need work; some haven't been looked at since...well...since a long time ago. The rest of the rules have changed quite a bit since then, but the spells haven't. Now that we have a new batch of mages and priests, hopefully we can make realm spells more interesting (but no, they are never intended to be powerful enough to stand alone or dominate the game; they are icing if you will, but no cake).
I've already started work on the Realm Magic chapter, which already look so much better. I think that is a prerequisite to getting the SPELLS right. I also need to do more work on Warfare, for those spells that tie directly into war.
But we're getting there, and feedback is highly appreciated at this stage.
-
A slightly related question, will Battle Magic make a return as the long lost 0-level spells? There has been much talk (ok, some at least) of that over the last... 9 years? I never liked the original system in BR, but the vague bonus granted by spellcasters now is not ideal either.
-
A slightly related question, will Battle Magic make a return as the long lost 0-level spells? There has been much talk (ok, some at least) of that over the last... 9 years? I never liked the original system in BR, but the vague bonus granted by spellcasters now is not ideal either.
Time permitting it will; battle spells are short-duration, limited target (read a few rounds and one unit) versions of other realm magic. Their big advantage is a casting time of 1 battle round.
-
Could you look over the Gold Rush spell (Arcane 5th)? Just to confirm if it works like written or if it's different.
-
Revision of spells starts Mondag 16th March - when I'm back from boozing.
-
The Gold Rush spell. I think it needs some kind of nerf, though I'm not sure what. The effect of it, if cast on a large province, is insane. It is expensive though (5 GB to prepare, 4 GB to cast, 8 RP/province).
Suggestions:
Make the casting cost scale with the size of the affected provinces.
Reduce duration and area affected.
Put a ceiling on the gold gain - ie. you can only generate level/2 gold in each province each turn.
Remove or drastically reduce the province growth modifier.
Gold Rush
Conjuration (Creation)
Caster level: Sor/Wiz 5
Components: 4 GB
Regency: 8 RP/province
Casting Time: One free action (1 day)
Range: Long
Targets: 1 province + 1 province/3 caster levels after 5th
Duration: 1 turn/3 caster levels (1 month/caster level)
Saving Throw: None
Spell Resistance: No
Description: There are sudden finds of precious metals and other valuables in the province. Fortunes are made quickly and people flock to the site to take part in the dream of untold riches.
Spell Effect: The affected provinces receive a +50% income bonus and a +5 province growth bonus.
-
I would add the accompanying danger of adversely affecting the economy in general. When Cortez and Co struck gold in the Americas, european economy received an initial boost, only to be accompanied by massive price increases as the market adapted to an increased supply of gold.
Not sure how this could be done in the game without a lot of bookkeeping, but a solution could be for repeated casting to have this undesired effect. Maybe a small note in the P&H, keeping count of the number of gold rushes cast.. Not that the game should keep careful track of inflation, but, consider the possibility that EVERYONE's gold reserves suddenly become slightly less worth..
In fact, this might be an effective way to keep the spell in line... You hear that a gold rush happened in this or that province and as a result of market adapting your own treasury is suddenly 2-3% smaller as losses are spread out throughout Anuire...
Thus the spell retains its potency and brings instant wealth but political repercussions could be severe since you can't hide a gold rush :D
-
Or... as it has been pointed out to me that this might be difficult to implement mechanics wise... it could simply deduce 1 (or more) from the variable income of several or all realms.
That way the caster gets to piss everyone off :)
-
Ok, so the "broken" scenario is if this is cast on something like Ilien, yes?
Cost 9 GB and 8 regency (or 4,5 GB if 2 provinces or 3 GB if 3 provinces)
1. Does it boosts province income by 50%?
OR
2. Does it boost the income of all holdings in that province by 50%?
-
Ok, so the "broken" scenario is if this is cast on something like Ilien, yes?
Cost 9 GB and 8 regency (or 4,5 GB if 2 provinces or 3 GB if 3 provinces)
1. Does it boosts province income by 50%?
OR
2. Does it boost the income of all holdings in that province by 50%?
Province income.
-
Which I think means that only law holders benefit from that spells?
-
Which I think means that only law holders benefit from that spells?
No, it means that nobody benefits. Law does not claim from province income any more, and the province ruler does not get it either. Which is why I think Bjørn might be wrong on this one. Alternatively it is meant as a spell to benefit the populace in general. ???
Ignore the careless man's comment.
-
Take a look at the P&H formulas, I think you still get income from province, Even. If you are not suppose to, then a lot of law holders are going to be very unhappy.
-
Actually, after doing a little testing, I think it may be better if Gold Rush simply do one of the following:
1. Double Province Level (as a temporary modifier)
Most powerful, easy to account for. I would not allow it to stack with anything though.
2. Add a +5 circumstance bonus to Province level (temporarily)
Still powerful, but not uber powerful. Doesn't require a ton of work for the DMs to accomplish. I think allowing this to stack wouldn't be a big deal.
3. The spell is simulated by setting province prosperity to Triving - Utopian (make it random) for a set period of time.
-
Take a look at the P&H formulas, I think you still get income from province, Even. If you are not suppose to, then a lot of law holders are going to be very unhappy.
You're quite right. In my mind I had it that Law holders claimed from the province, but when I increased the province income in the excel cell, there was no increase in Law income. Silly me, as the Law income is not tied to the income on the province cell, but rather makes to separate, if compatible, calculations.
-
Actually, after doing a little testing, I think it may be better if Gold Rush simply do one of the following:
1. Double Province Level (as a temporary modifier)
Most powerful, easy to account for. I would not allow it to stack with anything though.
2. Add a +5 circumstance bonus to Province level (temporarily)
Still powerful, but not uber powerful. Doesn't require a ton of work for the DMs to accomplish. I think allowing this to stack wouldn't be a big deal.
Option 1 is quite a lot less useful in low-level provinces, but that might be a good or bad thing. I think option 2 is less unbalancing, as it does not go overboard in high-level provinces, but is still useful in remote regions as well. The main problem as it is would be that the effect would benefit all holding owners, not just Law holdings claiming from province income, which is counter to Bjørn's statement above. Personally I don't think it is reasonable to think that the merchants, priests and everybody else in the province would benefit from a goldrush. More tithes to the church coffers, great influx of people for the guilder to charge extortionate rents from.
As you say, the easiest to implement in the P&H as well, and makes it easy to compare against other boosting spells, is to use the current implementation of increasing the province level.
3. The spell is simulated by setting province prosperity to Triving - Utopian (make it random) for a set period of time.
This has the problem of giving a massive bonus on actions as well, which might no really be the intended result.
For province growth I think it could be interesting to change this to equal the province income, rather than some set number. This would enable high prosperity, low tax provinces to grow quicker. And it gives a neat way of incorporating the benefit from bless, goldrush etc as a bonus in province level increases the province income significantly.
-
Oh boy, I misread this spell completely. Given that it only affect province income, it's actually not overpowered IMO. Still useful though.
Some calculations:
Cast at the minmum level (9th) it affects two provinces for 3 turns. Casting it on a level 6 and 5 province, with Heavy taxation and full Law collection, will have the following effect:
Income (level 5): 5*5/5(base income) *0.5(multiplier) *0.4(law collection) = 1.0 GB
Income (level 6): 5*5/5(base income) *0.5(multiplier) *0.4(law collection) = 1.4 GB
Over three turns, that adds up to 7.2 GB (some rounding error here)
The spell costs 5 GB to prepare and 4 GB to cast, meaning it looses 1.8 GB, but it also costs 16 RP to cast, which is not covered.
However, it also adds 5*2*3 = 30 GB in province growth, which is a hefty bonus.
If we boost the casting level to 11, affecting 3 provinces (adding in a level 4 province) for 3 turns, the following happens:
Income (level 4): 4*4/5(base income) *0.5(multiplier) *0.4(law collection) = 0.6 GB
Income (level 5): 5*5/5(base income) *0.5(multiplier) *0.4(law collection) = 1.0 GB
Income (level 6): 6*6/5(base income) *0.5(multiplier) *0.4(law collection) = 1.4 GB
Over three turns, that adds up to 9 GB (some rounding error here)
So now the GB cost breaks even, but there's still the 24 RP. However, now the growth bonus becomes 5*3*3 = 45 GB.
So the spell's purpose, as it is now, becomes clear. It is NOT for gaining an income, it is for boosting province growth. Unless we're either talking very high caster level (12+) or very high level provinces. That leaves a few possible issues:
Is this the intention of the spell? If not, something needs to be done.
The calculations are kinda difficult to implement in the P&H, though some small changes can be made to the P&H to make it easier.
For the suggestions:
It is kinda weird that is has no effect on Trade Holdings. Since trade explicitly represents income from export/import, that might be preferably.
Giving a constant bonus would make the spell easier to predict and make it less powerful for high level provinces. An option could be to add +5 to the province level for the purpose of Province collection only... this would open some funky questions - mainly if this stacks with Bless or not and how on earth to calculate it. Adding directly to the province level, like a bless spell, would be very powerful. I think this should remain the domain of the bless spell.
Calculations:
+5 to province level for the purpose of province collection only, heavy taxes, level 4, 5 and 6 province:
Level 4: Income: (9*9)/5*0.4-(4*4)/5*0.4 = 5.2 GB
Level 5: Income: (10*10)/5*0.4-(5*5)/5*0.4 = 6.0 GB
Level 6: Income: (11*11)/5*0.4-(6*6)/5*0.4 = 6.8 GB
Err... Broken. Minimum level (on 4 and 5 province): +33.6 GB from one casting. Inflation! Bonus need to be smaller. +2 bonus is the absolute maximum for this bonus, anything above gets crazy.
So, the questions remain:
Is the purpose of this spell to boost income or to boost growth? If the first, it needs to change, if the latter, it's fine.
Should it affect Trade Holding levels as well?
Should the effect be changed to make it easier to implement in the P&H or should the P&H be changed slightly (as we go, starting with the provinces affected) to make it easier to calculate?
Why is the pie always a lie?
-
Actually, after doing a little testing, I think it may be better if Gold Rush simply do one of the following:
1. Double Province Level (as a temporary modifier)
Most powerful, easy to account for. I would not allow it to stack with anything though.
2. Add a +5 circumstance bonus to Province level (temporarily)
Still powerful, but not uber powerful. Doesn't require a ton of work for the DMs to accomplish. I think allowing this to stack wouldn't be a big deal.
3. The spell is simulated by setting province prosperity to Triving - Utopian (make it random) for a set period of time.
1. Definitely not.
2. Definitely not.
3. No; it's not a pros. modifying spell.
-
The spell works well enough for now; it SHOULD benefit guild/trade more, rather than growth, but its not excessivley unbalance or useless.
-
I'm working my way through ALL the realm spell; I've just finished Celestial Siege Train.
There are many changes large and small.
Now is a good time to come up with suggestion as to what spells need fixing (and not).
-
Considering that Clerics are the primary PC realm spell caster. It might be worth expanding the realm spell selection?
-
I don't think you should bother updating 7th, 8th, and 9th level realm spells. Most, if not all, domains will never get there, let alone meet the casting requirements -- furthermore, those spells should seem more hypothetical/mythological.
-
Thanks for the advice, but that wasn't really what I was after. I'm doing all the spells in alphabetical order.
-
The general idea is to make all spells useful; and by that I mean enable to caster to do something that he can't using mundane means. Magic is NOT supposed to be more powerful than other domain-related activities; just different (and best used to complement other actions and mundane assets).
I'll post some sample spells to give you an idea what we are talking about.
-
Cloak of the Chameleon
Illusion (Glamour)
Caster level: Arcane 1, Primordial 1
Regency: 1 RP/unit (infantry or specialist) or 2 RP/unit (cavalry or artillery)
Casting Time: One free action (1 hour, 10 battle rounds)
Range: Close (LoS)
Targets: 1 unit/caster level
Duration: 1 domain turn (1 week/caster levels)
Saving Throw: Will negates (harmless)
Spell Resistance: Yes (harmless)
Description: Cloak of the Chameleon was extensively used by the Rjuven druids during the Anuirean attempt to conquer the Highlands. The spell allowed bands of Rjuven warriors to penetrate deep into Anuirean territory, wreaking untold havoc on supply lines and mustering areas.
Spell Effect: Affected units become very difficult to detect during the strategic/campaign stage. Increase the DDC of any action trying to gather intelligence about affected units by 10 (i.e. both Espionage domain actions and reconnaissance have problems locating the units).
The affected units can start any battle they take part in as hidden units (not visible to the opposing player), provided that the controlling general won the Warcraft check to initiate the battle. The units can start the battle deployed in any square on their half of the battlefield. The units loose their hidden status if they move, attack, or use some special abilities (DM discretion).
Character Caster level Equivalent: Affected characters gain a +10 enchantment bonus to Hide checks. This bonus also applies to any mounts the character may be riding or leading.
DM notes: This spells enables the caster to very cheaply make a small infantry force that is hard to detect. Perfect for sidhe, the Wardens and other sneaky bastards who like to send scouts/archers hiking through the woods. But beyond avoiding detection the spell isn't all that powerful (since its 1st lvl and cheap to use).
-
The general idea is to make all spells useful; and by that I mean enable to caster to do something that he can't using mundane means. Magic is NOT supposed to be more powerful than other domain-related activities; just different (and best used to complement other actions and mundane assets).
I'll post some sample spells to give you an idea what we are talking about.
If I want to use a spell not updated yet you'll use the version written in the RGuide?
-
Yes; subject to alterations on the fly if the spell is terribly outdated.
-
Currently: Death Plague...
-
Declaration of Sainthood
Conjuration (Healing)
Caster level: Divine 7
Regency: 100 RP
Casting Time: One free action (1 day)
Range: Touch
Target: 1 dead person
Duration: 1 decade (1 year/caster level)
Saving Throw: Will negates (harmless)
Spell Resistance: Yes (harmless)
Description: This mighty blessing turns a fallen hero of the faith into a true saint. The newly ascended saint will take a special interest in the temple that helped elevate him, until other duties call him away.
Spell Effect: The spell can only affect characters that are already dead. Restoring a dead character that has been the target of this spell is impossible.
For the duration of the spell, the temple receives 5 extra RP per turn (alternatively the caster can specify another domain as the recipient of this bonus).
If called upon for aid the saint will try to aid the domain as best he can; usually in subtle and invisible ways. Each time the saint is called upon it consumes one year of the spell’s duration.
Character Level Equivalent: The target (the caster must be able to touch the target’s dead body) turns into a saint (divine rank 0, apply the saint template). The change is instantaneous. The new saint should be assigned a narrow portfolio.
DM Notes: Example of a fun, if not always very useful spell...actually you can get back twice the RP you used to cast the spell, but it will take a while. But the main thing is the coolness factor; what domain can resist having a patron saint :D
-
Very few temples will ever be able to cast the spell, I would think. But it does seem pretty cool!
-
Very few temples will ever be able to cast the spell, I would think. But it does seem pretty cool!
There will be a spell that bumps your temple holding by 1 lvl, so that those with a temple 6 CAN do cool stuff if they REALLY want to.
But note that you can have someone else do it for you; so once someone in the CoT has a temple 7, perhaps they can do the casting.
-
Like you need to do anything else to make Even more annoying. :)
-
Like you need to do anything else to make Even more annoying. :)
Hey, don't belittle my job of being annoying.
On a more serious note, getting twice the RP payment back is a huge boost. Compared to many of the structures in the game it would be a huge long term boon
-
Caster level: Divine 7
Does it mean that lvl 7 cleric can cast it? Or is it a lvl 7 spell (lvl 13 cleric required)?
-
Caster level: Divine 7
Does it mean that lvl 7 cleric can cast it? Or is it a lvl 7 spell (lvl 13 cleric required)?
It's as per normal spell descriptions, so a level 7 spell.
-
DM Notes: Example of a fun, if not always very useful spell...actually you can get back twice the RP you used to cast the spell, but it will take a while. But the main thing is the coolness factor; what domain can resist having a patron saint :D
The coolness factor is what makes this spell great. The number of RP is nice but getting to research a level 7 spell and cast it wasm I assume, not free
-
There is a new type of duration - Sustained. As I understand it, spells with that duration can be sustained indefinitely as long as the cost is paid.
Will Protection from Realm Magic be one of the new spells with Sustained duration? As it is now it's hard for a low-level caster to maintain magical protection as he/she would have to cast the spell quite often. Is this going to change?
The same goes for similar spells, such as Ward Against Scrying.
-
There is a new type of duration - Sustained. As I understand it, spells with that duration can be sustained indefinitely as long as the cost is paid.
Will Protection from Realm Magic be one of the new spells with Sustained duration? As it is now it's hard for a low-level caster to maintain magical protection as he/she would have to cast the spell quite often. Is this going to change?
The same goes for similar spells, such as Ward Against Scrying.
Sustained only means that if the source/temple powering the spell is disrupted, the spell immediately ends. As opposed to timed spells that just last their duration once cast (unless dispelled) - such as the various buff spells.
A few additional spells now have a duration of 1 year (1 month/level)
-
Ah ok, my mistake then.
-
Gods this is boring...I'm well 'over the top' now, and that is VERY comforting. The more I work with the spell, the more lacking I find many of them to be, so I'll probably will have to look through all of them once more...and of course they need playtesting.
Not all the spells will be super-powerful; that is not the intention. Magic is different and can also be a powerful enhancer for other aspects of the domain rules, but a wizard isn't inherently more powrful than a fighter regent/mundane domain. If you're looking for that, you've come to the wrong place.
Spell seem to fall into three groups; spells that affect provinces in various ways, spells that are effective during wars but have long durations and are best cast BETWEEN battles, and spells that are actually of use on the field of battle.
-
This might become abundantly clear once the revised spell descriptions are released, but aallow me to ruminate.
Spells fall into rough categories as outlined by Bjorn, and generally become more powerful through two separate mechanisms; increased spell level or increased caster level.
As the caster level increases, the effect of the spells generally don't become more powerfull, but cover a larger area or have a longer duration. This increase typically has a corresponding increase in RP cost. The only saving is in the GB and Action component of preparing the spells. This allows higher level casters to be more 'efficient' with their actions and less dependent on courts for mass preparations, but the overall power level is sptill constrained by RP availability.
As spell levels increase it becomes less clear. Spells generally become more powerfull, but there is an increase in GB and/or RP cost. E.g. for spells that fall into the category 'zap unit on battlefield', is it intended that they become more effective per RP for the higher level spells? Or should the effect per RP remain relatively constant, and there again only being a slight efficiency gain in the number of actions required to acheive the desired effect?
Perhaps a way towards balancing the spells, other than lengthy playtesting, would be to consider a table of approximate effect per RP for various effects such as hits to unit, stat bonus to unit and prosperity bonus to province. Might be hard to set a fixed number to all things, and these are only some of the possible effects out there, but could be a good ballpark to work with for future spell creation as well.
-
I'm working my way through ALL the realm spell; I've just finished Celestial Siege Train.
There are many changes large and small.
Now is a good time to come up with suggestion as to what spells need fixing (and not).
One example of a spell that has always bothered me is Ward Against Realm Scrying. This relies somewhat on a character level Scry check, which is not really that appropriate. It also doesn't tie in that closely with Realm Scrying as well. Perhaps a more suitable effect would be to simply increase the DCC of any Scrying spells.
Could there perhaps also be a spell out there that obfuscates the affairs of the court, and increases the DCC of a regular Espionage attempt? There must surely be something in any respected wizards aresenal to prevent an assassin from stumbling upon them in the dark.
-
That is one spell that is being altered; since the Scry spell now enables an Espionage action, the Ward spell must do...something other than it does now :)
-
As the caster level increases, the effect of the spells generally don't become more powerfull, but cover a larger area or have a longer duration. This increase typically has a corresponding increase in RP cost. The only saving is in the GB and Action component of preparing the spells. This allows higher level casters to be more 'efficient' with their actions and less dependent on courts for mass preparations, but the overall power level is sptill constrained by RP availability.
Duration is generally fixed in the PbeM, since a duriation of 1 week/lvl translates to 1 domain turn...regardless of your caster level. Number of affected targets DO vary with level, following a 1/1, 1/2 or 1/3 ratio (some spells have only a single target regardless of caster level). Some spells also have other level-dependent benefits.
So higher-level casters DO have an advantage, but it is intentionally one that relates primarily to 'action efficiency' (i.e. for the prepare time/cost of a single spell you can hit more targets) but offers no benefit in terms of RP used.
-
As spell levels increase it becomes less clear. Spells generally become more powerfull, but there is an increase in GB and/or RP cost. E.g. for spells that fall into the category 'zap unit on battlefield', is it intended that they become more effective per RP for the higher level spells? Or should the effect per RP remain relatively constant, and there again only being a slight efficiency gain in the number of actions required to acheive the desired effect?
There will be a greater differentiation between spell levels now;
- a 1st lvl zap spell might cause 1 hit on a failed save/successful attack roll (and would have a cap on number of targets affected/damage dice dealt, just as personal spells do).
- a 5th lvl zap spell would do more damage and could potentially hit more targets
- a 9th lvl sap spell would just kill the target unit on a failed save, and still do heavy damage on a successful save.
The actual rate of RP to damage potential would remain relatively constant; but with a slight advantage to higher level spells (at least as per this posting - more testing is needed).
-
Any update on the realm spells? I was looking at Crusade and Holy War, and found that neither was of great benefit. Especially Holy War has a very limited use due to the 4GB cost of preparing the spell. Assuming it is cast on something like 8 Armsmen, the saving will only be 8GB, against a cost of 4 GB, 16 RP and 1 Regent Action. While there is potential for some more savings if used on even higher cost units, it is not too frequent there are 8 units of knights gathered. If used on fewer units, the benefit becomes even less.
Edit: One thing that would make the spell slightly more versatile would be if it could be cast on units in more than one Province. This would make it much more likely that the spell could benefit a sufficient number of units for it to be economical.
-
Alternatively the spell could have it's duration increased. E.g. 2 turns, and a higher level spell could have 4 turns.
-
OR perhaps...
For each season the RP cost is paid, the unit costs is reduced.
This has the nice effect of forcing choices...
-
Any update on the realm spells? I was looking at Crusade and Holy War, and found that neither was of great benefit. Especially Holy War has a very limited use due to the 4GB cost of preparing the spell. Assuming it is cast on something like 8 Armsmen, the saving will only be 8GB, against a cost of 4 GB, 16 RP and 1 Regent Action. While there is potential for some more savings if used on even higher cost units, it is not too frequent there are 8 units of knights gathered. If used on fewer units, the benefit becomes even less.
Edit: One thing that would make the spell slightly more versatile would be if it could be cast on units in more than one Province. This would make it much more likely that the spell could benefit a sufficient number of units for it to be economical.
I would never think that economics should be the main consern if one need to use spells like Crusade and Holy War. They can not be spells one use for the odd fight every other year.
Are really all spells to be about saving gold? Spells should just as much be about getting a dramatic effect, at a high cost in gold.
-
I disagree.
Magic should be able having a tangible effect, without shattering game balance. Magic is suppose to supplement, not supplant, domain actions.
-
I disagree.
Magic should be able having a tangible effect, without shattering game balance. Magic is suppose to supplement, not supplant, domain actions.
so Crusade and Holy War should be used to save gold?
-
I disagree.
Magic should be able having a tangible effect, without shattering game balance. Magic is suppose to supplement, not supplant, domain actions.
so Crusade and Holy War should be used to save gold?
If the primary function of the spell is to reduce upkeep (for Holy War) I would certainly hope it saved some gold bars rather than increase the amount of resources required.
-
I was commenting more about magic in general and less about those two spells; they appear broken/ineffective as written.
The spell should either last a year, or be considerably cheaper in terms of GB/RP cost.
-
A lot of spells have either their cost in RP lowered, affect more targets or last longer. There were many useless spells before. The intention is to make all of the spells useful in a least some circumstances.
But its like a collectible card game; some card seem useless by themselves, but used with other spells or in certain situations they become very powerful. Not easy to balance them.
-
In terms of balance and cost effectiveness, the spells affecting mutplie targets that have either 'base' or 'base plus number of targets' are effected excessively by level - not only does high level give more area of effect, it also spreads the base cost out making each target cheaper.
So, for example, celestial blessing at 4 GB + 4 Gb per target province is very different from net outcome if you can cast it on 2 targets rather than just 1, and still have quite a difference (to those of us who count gold in decimals not tens anyway) between 2 and 3 provinces.
It would be easier to balance spells if the effect as 'x' per unit/province/target than base+'x'.
On the cost:benefit point I vary between hung up (it's just a different way of doing an action) and not fussed (some effects can have huge tactical effect in the right circumstances justifying excessive cost).
From a fluff view I'd rather that a wizard hurl fiery death or summon demons rather than hire mercenaries as otherwise they just stop casting spells and, well, become poor guilders. So I'd look for a balance usually, possibly a slight advantage for magic use to reflect its limitations (need for local source, chance to dispel) or disadvantage for benefits (multiple spells for 1 action, some spells give unexpected tactical advantages or are hard to counter for a non-spellcaster). depending on the spell concerned.