Mage OP

[m0stlym0nk]

Originally Posted by Pete Mack

The old banish evil spell had huge problems: LOS in a destroyed area means a lot of monsters stick around, *including some in reverse LOS.

Ah, interesting point - good reminder, Pete. All the more reason to back away from that and head toward an unhindered los radius.

[archolewa]

Originally Posted by Pete Mack

The old banish evil spell had huge problems: LOS in a destroyed area means a lot of monsters stick arounx, *i cluding some in reverse LOS.

Nerfing a scroll that you might have only 5 copies of seems ... pretty harsh.

I agree. I think the problem isn't (Mass) Banishment itself, but rather its spammability. A problem that only applies to Mages. In fact, Banishment and Mass Banishment are *awesome* scrolls/staves. They're very powerful and very rare, meaning you have to always think carefully about whether now is a good time to use them.

One option that might get tomatoes thrown at me would be to just remove Banishment from the mage's spellbook entirely. Let them have Mass Banishment (they don't have the HP to deal with summons otherwise). But it seems that if our concern is that players are banishing the alphabet and then getting bored, and we really don't want them to banish the alphabet, then we should just stop them from banishing the alphabet. The only way to do that with the way Angband spells work would be to remove the spell from their spellbook.

[m0stlym0nk]

Originally Posted by archolewa

I agree. I think the problem isn't (Mass) Banishment itself, but rather its spammability. A problem that only applies to Mages. In fact, Banishment and Mass Banishment are *awesome* scrolls/staves. They're very powerful and very rare, meaning you have to always think carefully about whether now is a good time to use them.

One option that might get tomatoes thrown at me would be to just remove Banishment from the mage's spellbook entirely. Let them have Mass Banishment (they don't have the HP to deal with summons otherwise). But it seems that if our concern is that players are banishing the alphabet and then getting bored, and we really don't want them to banish the alphabet, then we should just stop them from banishing the alphabet. The only way to do that with the way Angband spells work would be to remove the spell from their spellbook.

That's a really good point, archolewa. It seems like the matrix of options includes:

1. The ducking-tomatoes concept of removing abusable-as-they-currently-stand spells from the mage books, but leaving the (rare) scrolls/etc that can be found.
2. Leave the scrolls/etc version OG, but update mage books version to operate differently/newschool (ie, essentially make the two be different spells)
3. Switch scrolls/etc AND mage spells to newschool, but tweak drop rates of scrolls/etc such that non-book users come out about even in terms of effectiveness over time. (Is this degree of control over drop rates something we actually have realistically/effectively?)

Am I forgetting any other permutations?

Broadly, what I'm kind of alluding to is that if we run with the idea that ban/ban-hammer are in need of a come-to-haysoos so that they aren't so "deleting enemies in the darkness", the whole thing does kinda scream for consistency across the experience: that the scrolls/etc reflect the mage spells in the same way the rest of the related game content interreflects.

In a lesser sense, this is kind of harkening back to what the JLE/2.7.x-to-2.8.x era would have gone through had GoI had a scroll/staff equivalent. If it's bad, it goes. But if it shouldn't for all, it should probably be consistent across the different presentations of the feature to stay Angband-ey (bit of a crappy hypothetical example, but I'm sure you know what I mean.)

[ewert]

Banishment:
Targetable banish-all-of-type sounds like a great idea to me. I see no problem with leaving scroll as is, there is a history of consumables being better than spells. Heck, I wouldn't even complain if you make scrolls be the same, but change staves to the new one, to make it even more varied.

Mass Banish:
Ground target radius effect with radius being 20-distance/2 (otherwise targeting it instead of using point blank makes no sense, unless you want to leave some behind behind you, which you still could with this formula). This way if you chuck it out far, you still get a blob instead of just making your circle smaller with the edge being at the same point. Or just keep it as is.

TBH, none of these mass banish changes make that much of a difference... the targetable with non-severe radius penalty would make clearing a vault with a single cast a little easier, since well, if you have the spell and want to, that vault will still be empty no matter what when you go there. So the only change would be less of a hassle for the same benefit.

[Voovus]

What if, instead of dealing damage to @, Banishment and Mass Banishment were to drain @'s Int?

(Personally, I would prefer it not to be nerfed at all. I can decide on the amount of cheese I want in my games myself, and this can vary from @ to @.)

[Mike]

If not everyone agrees what a mage should look like, could the way to go here be two (or even more) distinct mage tracks?
They could be classes (Wizard and Sorceror, perhaps), but wouldn't have to be - it could be done by having two capstone dungeon books, of which you get to study only one.
Just throwing out ideas here - I'm not sure what such books would look like. (Defensive vs. offensive, maybe?)

[Saru]

Originally Posted by archolewa

I agree. I think the problem isn't (Mass) Banishment itself, but rather its spammability.

Personally going to disagree here, the spell itself is just as flawed when cast through scrolls and staves. It's just the access to the flaw that really exposes it for what it is, a bandaid solution like removing access doesn't seem ideal both on the front of trying to make it more unique and balancing it.

[Selkie]

Originally Posted by Mike

If not everyone agrees what a mage should look like, could the way to go here be two (or even more) distinct mage tracks?
They could be classes (Wizard and Sorceror, perhaps), but wouldn't have to be - it could be done by having two capstone dungeon books, of which you get to study only one.
Just throwing out ideas here - I'm not sure what such books would look like. (Defensive vs. offensive, maybe?)

The idea of restriction of dungeon books or restriction of the number of spells you can learn has been raised by others earlier.

I personally think it's a good idea and would make the decision making in constructing your mage more interesting.

That said, I think the great drawback in restriction of spells is every sensible player will still prioritise the game winning spells (like mass banishment etc) and just casually ignore the junk, of which there are plenty.

For this reason I think the spell book idea is possibly stronger. If you were choosing between mass banishment and mana storm then it would really focus the mind.

My worry about this is that a mage without access to both defensive and offensive spells is a fairly weak character.

So I come back to what others have said, Angband will always have the ability to spam and play cheesy. As players, and particularly as we get better at the game, we can decide what elements of cheese to cut out of our game.

If mage feels OP then don't use the town, for example. It still feels OP then don't cast mass banishment

[bio_hazard]

I like the suggestion from the previous page for Banishment (to make it targeted).

For Mass Banishment, I'd be ok with nerfing it a bit (or more than a bit).

Make it Mass TO instead of Mass Banish?

Make it a timed effect, where monsters reappear after a time, either trickling back one by one or all at once after some interesting amount of time.

[Bogatyr]

Total agreement with NCountr et al re: "damn y'all, stop nerfing mages already" posts. 100%. I've written it before and will again: mage endgame total control is the reward of the forced pussy-footing around the whole first 75-80% of the game, where insta-death lurks around every single corner and encounter. If you don't like the play style, then don't play that way.

If you don't want to sit in the dark and remove the POS monsters from the level with banish, then don't. If you want to target a mob in LOS before banishing, then do so. Just don't force everybody else in to your idea of fun. Cheese is as cheese does. My recent favorite is druj farming. Sometimes I want those last couple levels fast and do it, sometimes I don't. That's the great thing about Angband, is the flexibility of play.