|
![]() |
#1 | |
Knight
Join Date: Oct 2019
Posts: 941
![]() |
Blackguards: 4.2.1 to 4.2.2 (and beyond?)
Overview
I've been soliciting feedback for quite a while and cultivating some of my own ideas. Sadly, I had a lot more time to devote to it when I did the big overhaul from 4.2.0 to 4.2.1, so I have to be selective about what I take on. But here's what I think can be accomplished, hopefully getting a lot of bang for the buck:
Details 1) At CL20 Blackguards can cast Leap to get 2.0 blows, and this is useful until statgain gets rolling. If we make Whirl cost 4, start at CL5, etc., then Whirl can fill this role instead. Leap will cost 5, start at CL10, and won't be useful anymore when already adjacent to the enemy. Whirl will get a lot more casts this way, while Leap should still have a useful role. 2) Nick already made this change for Maim in the nightly (hit required). I wanted to do this towards the end of my development cycle, but ran out of time to program something new. Right now in the nightly Maim only does 3 turns of stun, which is way too low IMO (1d5+5 in 4.2.1, same as the wand). And since Stun doesn't increment, it can actually reduce an enemy's stun counter! So I think we'll make this do 1d5+5 stun again if any of the Maim blows hit. Forceful Blow will still be pretty awesome against select foes, but requiring your melee blow to hit will make it much more interesting. I'm open to the idea of stunning an already stunned enemy adding to the stun counter, but this could have far-reaching consequences. 3) Already in the nightly Fear has a nice improvement: when an enemy would recover from Fear because it has nowhere to run, now the remaining Fear changes to a Hold. I think the messaging could be better, though. And I'd like fear'ed enemies to have the "debuff" flag which makes crits a bit easier (stun, confuse, and hold already do this). 4) Currently, when you get 1 or 2 extra blows from Bloodlust, it makes Leap, Whirl, and Maim much worse relative to normal bump-attacking, and that's boring. Bloodlust making those spells even better will be fun! I think everything that happens with Bloodlust is a lot of fun, except Hallucination. So I'm OK with doubling down on any of that if need be for balance. Right now Bloodlust doesn't reduce stats if you have sustain, and I think that could be changed, for starters. 5) I added Quake near the end of my changes, hoping it would give the BG something cool to do with too much mana. This was a dud. I've had a much better idea in the meantime. In Chapter 18 of The Silmarilion, Morgoth fights Fingolfin in single combat: Quote:
I don't have a good name for this yet. The word "smite" is used in this passage, so that's a good start. I don't think we should invoke the name of Morgoth since that would be a bit awkward when you are actually fighting Morgoth. The name of Grond is already used in the Necromancer's book. This will require a lot of testing, but could be very fun. Keep It Coming Let me know what you all think! Been a lot of good feedback over the last several months, and I appreciate it. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Swordsman
Join Date: Feb 2019
Location: Midwest
Age: 32
Posts: 261
![]() |
In general this sounds good. However, slowing when you miss is one serious downside. Maybe its not a big deal in the endgame, but many of the most dangerous enemies (including Morgoth) are so fast that it can be difficult to get up to speed with, and double moves risk instant death.
The last thing I need is to risk double moves from Morgoth because I missed! I feel like if you want a big downside, making it so expensive that you cant cast it more than once or twice with full SP would be sufficient. Keep in mind that draining all or most of your SP means you cant cast other spells until you get it back up. Thats a pretty high opportuniy cost for a class so reliant on in combat spells. I mean, you could spam potions of mana, but using this spell every other turn isnt doing any more damage than bumping every turn. Especially since missing would be the equivalent of missing every attack! Thats actually another concern. The final spell has two modes of failure: spell failure and attack missing. I worry that the two combined will make the spell too unreliable to be worth using. Im willing to wait and see though. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Knight
Join Date: Oct 2019
Posts: 941
![]() |
Yes, I think you've summarized nicely the give and take we're playing with here. Against Morgoth in particular, spikey damage isn't a problem because he's got just so much health. But against most foes you'd definitely prefer low variance damage output.
Still, the idea of some sort of penalty to the player when you miss with this ultimate attack is growing on me. I think there will have to be a small earthquake effect, too, otherwise it would be too easy to exploit the lava or whatever terrain feature the miss creates. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Veteran
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Adelaide, Australia
Posts: 2,433
![]() |
You angrily lash out at a nearby foe!
The small wooden chest was really a monster! |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Knight
Join Date: Oct 2019
Posts: 941
![]() |
Yeah you also do this to invisible monsters you can't see. It's on my list of minor fixes.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Veteran
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Adelaide, Australia
Posts: 2,433
![]() |
Maybe you could fix it by making blackguards just randomly attack inanimate objects.
You angrily lash out at a nearby foe! The chair is shattered!! More serious random idea. Allow blackguards to cast as a werewolf. Most of their spells make sense in wolf form. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
Knight
Join Date: Oct 2019
Posts: 941
![]() |
Are you saying keep it a shapechange effect, but allow spells? What about inventory access and all the other stuff you lose? I've thought many times that maybe this should have been a status effect and not a shapechange, but I haven't thought about fudging the shapechange rules.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 |
Veteran
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Adelaide, Australia
Posts: 2,433
![]() |
yeah I meant keep it as a shapechange. I see no reason for them to be able to use inventory if other shapes can't, it'd just be nice to be able to use there melee specials in wolf-form.
Not sure how messy it is to fudge the shapechange code, haven't really looked at it. Probably just needs an "and not" somewhere in the logic. Maybe worth considering how much of a traditional angband caster you want it to be. Can they blind cast? Cast confused? Cast without the books? Cast shapechanged? etc. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#9 | |
Swordsman
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 266
![]() |
Quote:
If the Blackguard had abilities they learned rather than spell books tho, then they could use those while shapechanged. ![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#10 |
Knight
Join Date: Oct 2019
Posts: 941
![]() |
Yeah, I agree with you guys. I would be reluctant to make exceptions for this shape specifically, but I think making exceptions for some BG spells to be cast when you normally couldn't cast would be fun and interesting.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Blackguards: 4.2.0 to 4.2.1 | DavidMedley | Vanilla | 263 | July 19, 2020 18:50 |
Blackguards and melee attacks | hein | Vanilla | 10 | September 16, 2019 22:14 |
Blackguards and Spellcasting | epatton | Vanilla | 2 | September 15, 2019 19:45 |