Spell / Phantasm re-work

[Sradac]

How about just make Illuminate not able to crit? I've seen plenty of abilities before that do not have the ability to critical. Illuminate would still do respectable damage, but not absolutely omgwtflolz damage when stealthed with a high shadowstrike

[Doctornull]

How about just make Illuminate not able to crit? I've seen plenty of abilities before that do not have the ability to critical. Illuminate would still do respectable damage, but not absolutely omgwtflolz damage when stealthed with a high shadowstrike

It would limit the useful damage window for Illuminate rather drastically, even for Archmages.

It wouldn't help with the Escort problem like the original proposal would.

Still, it'd be better than the current situation.

[Hachem_Muche]

After looking into the projector/projectile code, it should be possible to give the target of a stealthed attacker a chance to see the attacker (forcing stealth to break) whenever it is the target of an archery shot or a spell, without too much work. This appears to be an oversight in the code and should be implemented for consistency and to balance non-standard character builds, as previously mentioned.

If the stealth check is simply enforced in the order in which the targets are damaged, I think this change by itself will help mitigate the ranged nuking via spell by stealthed characters substantially. It's very unlikely that the stealth bonus will apply to several targets hit by a single attack, since the chance to break stealth will be checked for each target in turn -- i.e. the stealth bonuses will only be applied to the last target attacked if all of the previous targets also failed to see the attacker. (The chance to see a stealthed attacker is usually more than 10%, even against overmatched targets.)

While looking at this, I had another idea that might be even more helpful in balancing things. Since the idea behind the Lethality and Shadowstrike talents is to provide bonus damage for hitting a critical spot on the target, shouldn't this be more difficult if the attacker is far away? In other words, the bonuses from these talents could be reduced based on the distance between attacker and target.

My idea here is to reduce the bonus critical power - the multiplier increase, but not the base damage - by 10% per tile after the first. So an attacker (not seen) striking from stealth 5 tiles from its target would lose 40% of the bonus from these talents. This should be fairly easy to implement with minor changes to the physicalCrit, spellCrit, and mindCrit functions in Combat.lua, and would effectively enforce the melee oriented aspect of stealth in general.

[Doctornull]

While looking at this, I had another idea that might be even more helpful in balancing things. Since the idea behind the Lethality and Shadowstrike talents is to provide bonus damage for hitting a critical spot on the target, shouldn't this be more difficult if the attacker is far away? In other words, the bonuses from these talents could be reduced based on the distance between attacker and target.

My idea here is to reduce the bonus critical power - the multiplier increase, but not the base damage - by 10% per tile after the first. So an attacker (not seen) striking from stealth 5 tiles from its target would lose 40% of the bonus from these talents. This should be fairly easy to implement with minor changes to the physicalCrit, spellCrit, and mindCrit functions in Combat.lua, and would effectively enforce the melee oriented aspect of stealth in general.

That's brilliant.

It preserves the ability for casters to benefit from crits, and it rewards a Stealthy character placing himself in harm's way with full damage.

Also, it's target-order invariant, so the current illusion of spellcasting atomicity is preserved.

As a side-benefit, it helps the poor melee PC who's facing a Stealth Archmage boss...

[HousePet]

Wouldn't that affect archery too?

[Hachem_Muche]

Wouldn't that affect archery too?

Shouldn't it?

It should be pretty easy to give archery, which already has its own attack interface, special treatment if needed.

[HousePet]

I'm concerned that this is going to be too complicated.
Can't we just stick with reduced effect of Shadowstrike for spells/mind stuff, or similar?

[Crim, The Red Thunder]

Doesn't archery already not work with shadowstrike? I understood that stealth broke when you acted (Shoot talent), but shadowstrike was calculated when the target was hit, which is at a later point in time. As such, archers wouldn't get shadowstrike bonuses.

Or is this an old issue already resolved, and I'm behind the time?

[Doctornull]

Doesn't archery already not work with shadowstrike? I understood that stealth broke when you acted (Shoot talent), but shadowstrike was calculated when the target was hit, which is at a later point in time. As such, archers wouldn't get shadowstrike bonuses.

Or is this an old issue already resolved, and I'm behind the time?

IIRC, Archery works with Shadowstrike if you remain stealthed at the time damage is calculated, so for Archery, the Unseen Actions check applies BEFORE you get to mega-crit.

You're right that Stealth would normally break on attack, but Unseen Actions allows you to not break Stealth.

In this respect, Archery is vaguely similar to how melee attacks interact with Stealth, since melee attacks trigger a "canSee()" check before letting you mega-crit. Not actually the same, since Unseen Actions works differently from canSee(), but similar in the sense that you need to pass a dice roll before you get the cookie.

[Doctornull]

Wouldn't that affect archery too?

Shouldn't it?

It should be pretty easy to give archery, which already has its own attack interface, special treatment if needed.

IMHO a Stealth Archery nerf is not particularly needed, but since we can treat it separately, let's do that and not bundle it with any Stealth Spell fixes.

Archery nerf advocates can have their own thread to discuss that.

[Hachem_Muche]

I'm concerned that this is going to be too complicated.
Can't we just stick with reduced effect of Shadowstrike for spells/mind stuff, or similar?

This doesn't seem very complicated to me conceptually. Making it harder to hit a bullseye from farther away seems pretty intuitive.

As for a reduced effect, I assume you mean applying a flat 50%, or some other rate, of the normal bonuses? What should that rate be? I like the idea that there is more reward in exchange for more risk. It seems fair and enriches the tactical situation.

IMHO a Stealth Archery nerf is not particularly needed, but since we can treat it separately, let's do that and not bundle it with any Stealth Spell fixes.

Archery nerf advocates can have their own thread to discuss that.

I would lean towards making stealthed archery as consistent with other ranged combat from stealth as possible and then making adjustments from there, if needed. Tactically, there isn't much difference between a stealthed Shadowblade using channel staff and a stealthed rogue shooting a bow, so the game mechanics between them should be consistent.

As for how shooting a bow would work with stealth, what I had in mind was resolving the combat bonuses at the time the shot is fired (when the projectile is created). An actor in a target tile (archery targets tiles, not actors directly) would get a canSee() check against the attacker when the shot is fired, and combat bonuses would then be computed based on the result of the check and the attacker's position and any other relevant factors at that point.

[Doctornull]

I like the idea that there is more reward in exchange for more risk. It seems fair and enriches the tactical situation.

Agree!

I would lean towards making stealthed archery as consistent with other ranged combat from stealth as possible and then making adjustments from there, if needed. Tactically, there isn't much difference between a stealthed Shadowblade using channel staff and a stealthed rogue shooting a bow, so the game mechanics between them should be consistent.

The perspective I'm coming from is that most spells are area attacks while most Archery is single-target, but you're right, we should treat single-target ranged attacks the same.

Maybe we should impose less of a distance penalty on single-target spells?
Or more of a distance penalty per extra target?

As for how shooting a bow would work with stealth, what I had in mind was resolving the combat bonuses at the time the shot is fired (when the projectile is created). An actor in a target tile (archery targets tiles, not actors directly) would get a canSee() check against the attacker when the shot is fired, and combat bonuses would then be computed based on the result of the check and the attacker's position and any other relevant factors at that point.

Just off the top of my head, this would seem to reward slow missiles + Bone Grab or similar.

That's already an entertaining tactic, but I'd hesitate to make it objectively optimal.

[Hachem_Muche]

Just off the top of my head, this would seem to reward slow missiles + Bone Grab or similar.

That's already an entertaining tactic, but I'd hesitate to make it objectively optimal.

Sounds like a "creative use of game skills" to me.
Actually it's to handle the common case of a projectile hitting in the same turn that it is shot. Also, you don't want to allow a fast attacker to abuse the system by firing a shot and then activating stealth before the projectile hits. If it doesn't hit in the same turn, that's probably because the target is some distance away, where, presumably, the stealth bonuses are reduced.

You could also put in a check on projectile impact that the actor is in the same destination tile the projectile was fired at. (This information is already stored in the appropriate entity code.) With this, you could further restrict the stealth bonuses to only apply to the original target. So using scatter-shot from stealth, for example, would give stealth bonuses only against the target selected, while any others would just get normal (no stealth bonuses) damage.

[Doctornull]

Just off the top of my head, this would seem to reward slow missiles + Bone Grab or similar.

That's already an entertaining tactic, but I'd hesitate to make it objectively optimal.

Sounds like a "creative use of game skills" to me.

It only sounds that way because it's currently uncommon.
It's only uncommon because it's currently not particularly overpowered as a tactic.

Make it the best available tactic and you'll see people saying things like: "OH LOL NOOB you don't have teh Telekinetic Core as a Rogue, that's the only good Tier 2 artifact for a Slinger."

Actually it's to handle the common case of a projectile hitting in the same turn that it is shot. Also, you don't want to allow a fast attacker to abuse the system by firing a shot and then activating stealth before the projectile hits.

Agree with this, but only because IMHO ranged shots and ranged spells ought to work the same, and spells + mind powers have their crit bonus calculated and added when they are fired.

This incentivizes getting the heck out of the way of a slow-moving critical attack of all 3 kinds.

You could also put in a check on projectile impact that the actor is in the same destination tile the projectile was fired at.

Nah, that unfairly rewards beams even more than they're currently unfairly rewarded. Bolts need to stay competitive, the archery kind and the spell / mind kind.

With this, you could further restrict the stealth bonuses to only apply to the original target. So using scatter-shot from stealth, for example, would give stealth bonuses only against the target selected, while any others would just get normal (no stealth bonuses) damage.

So Piercing Shot would only gain a stealth bonus against the FARTHEST target?

That's terribly unintuitive.

Please no.

[HousePet]

This doesn't seem very complicated to me conceptually. Making it harder to hit a bullseye from farther away seems pretty intuitive.

Intuitive yes, but how are you going to make it clear in game that this is what is happening and by how much it will impact performing attack X?