Needing staff/wand to cast

[Danielmoscow]

How do you feel about it?

[Morthor]

I hope he only meant for certain spells. Maybe the lower-level ones will not need a wand/staff or it would be kind of ridiculous.

[Henu989]

It's a good thing.

Makes magic users need equipment like others.

Edit:
Also, I would love to see dual wieldable wands that I can use with a sword.

[Bunkah]

How do you feel about it?

I like the idea... you will have to switch your weapons to use spells.. which will make it somewhat harder to switch from melee to range and so on.

[Sapgui]

Edit:
Also, I would love to see dual wieldable wands that I can use with a sword.

will love it to! *cast* *swing* cast* arr like Gandalf :lmao:

[Beorg]

It's unecessary. I wanted to be able to heal myself or comrades in combat, but also fight like a warrior. I could have dealt with a slower casting time, or less healing effect, but making me switch to a wand or staff is something I can't do in the midst of combat--seeing as I don't want to, and they probably will make it so that you can't change weapons then as well. They could have implemented other restrictions to casting without a catalyst, or a damage or speed boost when you do use a staff or wand, but we will see how it fares in beta first.

[IcePillow]

Very well, thank you.
What do you think about it?

[VenomKing666]

It's a good thing.

Makes magic users need equipment like others.

Edit:
Also, I would love to see dual wieldable wands that I can use with a sword.

Because they didnt need reagents to cast these spells at all, rite ?

[Largion]

It's unecessary. I wanted to be able to heal myself or comrades in combat, but also fight like a warrior. I could have dealt with a slower casting time, or less healing effect, but making me switch to a wand or staff is something I can't do in the midst of combat--seeing as I don't want to, and they probably will make it so that you can't change weapons then as well. They could have implemented other restrictions to casting without a catalyst, or a damage or speed boost when you do use a staff or wand, but we will see how it fares in beta first.

Im guessing there will be outher healing skills for warriors.

[Henu989]

Because they didnt need reagents to cast these spells at all, rite ?
Reagents are more like arrows.
The Wand/Staff is the bow.

[Jonkar]

It's unecessary. I wanted to be able to heal myself or comrades in combat, but also fight like a warrior.

That's the fucking reason it's in. To balance shit.

Else everything turns into massive 2 day battles where everyone heals everyone.

[VenomKing666]

Reagents are more like arrows.
The Wand/Staff is the bow.

...

:|

:| .....

Hum...

[epicor]

Archers req a bow and arrows, why shouldnt casters req a focus item and regs?

[Jonkar]

...

:|

:| .....

Hum...

It's not his problem you can't understand shit. (In other words: He's right)

[Sapgui]

Im guessing there will be outher healing skills for warriors.

someone knows something about potions? *g*
and yes, i think there will be at least 2 or 3 ways to heal yourself/others without magic

[Henu989]

...

:|

:| .....

Hum...

My post makes perfect sense.
You just don't have the mental capasity to decipher my ramplings!

[VenomKing666]

That's the fucking reason it's in. To balance shit.

Else everything turns into massive 2 day battles where everyone heals everyone.

Protip: Reagents

[VenomKing666]

My post makes perfect sense.
You just don't have the mental capasity to decipher my ramplings!

No, you fail to have the mental capacity to realise I was just agreeing there.

Oh and it's "capacity" with a fucking "C".

[Kahlan]

That's the fucking reason it's in. To balance shit.

Else everything turns into massive 2 day battles where everyone heals everyone.

^^ /Agree. If everyone could heal the game would be neverending because no one would need to rely on a straight up buff/heal character in their group.

[Henu989]

No, you fail to have the mental capacity to realise I was just agreeing there.
Oh...
Sorry..
I'm not used to people agreeing with me.

Oh and it's "capacity" with a fucking "C".
Sorry for making a typo, I shall now go whip my self until I pass out.

[Beorg]

That's the fucking reason it's in. To balance shit.

Else everything turns into massive 2 day battles where everyone heals everyone.

I don't mean major heals, perhaps a reduction for the armor type you're wearing. I believe Tasos has stated that healing in Darkfall won't be huge unlike World of Warcraft. I don't expect to be able to constantly heal myself, so maybe a way to make your heals less powerful each time you cast them during combat. Or a limit, where you can't be healed any more after a few times. Perhaps a way to make each heal slower than the next if casted in rapid sucession. A cooldown, a limit to the number of regeants for healing you can carry so that it's impossible for you to constantly heal. There are tons of possibilities. I don't think you should be able to get the heals of a full-time healer, nor should you do the damage of an all-out warrior. I misphrased that sentence in my last post, I am sorry if I confused you.

[VenomKing666]

Oh...
Sorry..
I'm not used to people agreeing with me.
Maybe I wasnt crystal clear either :|

Sorry for making a typo, I shall now go whip my self until I pass out.

Great ! You can't say you didnt deserved it.

[epicor]

we already know that armor slows casting. its the balance point around which casters and melee are centerred. so you COULD heal and wear plate, but you wouldnt be doing any decent healing.

Also, dont forget you can easily heal you enemies on accident.

[Jonkar]

I don't mean major heals, perhaps a reduction for the armor type you're wearing. I believe Tasos has stated that healing in Darkfall won't be huge unlike World of Warcraft. I don't expect to be able to constantly heal myself, so maybe a way to make your heals less powerful each time you cast them during combat. Or a limit, where you can't be healed any more after a few times. Perhaps a way to make each heal slower than the next if casted in rapid sucession. A cooldown, a limit to the number of regeants for healing you can carry so that it's impossible for you to constantly heal. There are tons of possibilities.

Then use potions/herbs. Problem solved.

Protip: Reagents

What's your point?

[Eternalsinner]

I think its great, casters should be forced to use equipment just like anyone else. you disarm thier wand and they should be fucked just like the guy with the big sword. im sure youll be able to switch weapons in combat, there isnt auto targeting or sticky targeting in darkfall so its not like you can click on someone and just be "in combat".

[VenomKing666]

What's your point?

"Oh guys wait for me while I go get my resgents at my bank to spam some more heals."

In other words: People will soon or late be out of reagents. And also you got to aim them, so spamming them isnt the best thing to do, and I also believe it will cost mana and some casting time.

[Darkfalz]

Yeah... if you needed to use a wand to cast magic, then why wouldn't someone just pick up a torch or a crossbow instead? How was magic invented in the first place? Some dick wanting to do everything the superfuckinghard way and miraculously stumbled on a little piece of magic wood? Stupid. Make wands increase the power of the spell to the point where it's far better to use with one, but don't take make them necessary.

[Beorg]

Then use potions/herbs. Problem solved.

What's your point?

Potions and herbs fit into the healing category, in my opinion, but according to you, isn't there the possibility that i'll use them back-to-back, making me invulnerable?

His point is that regeants will limit you to how many times you can cast before you run out. I don't think you'd be able to scrounge up the resources to make all of them for a whole army.

We're also forgetting mana. It costs mana and regeants to cast most spells, along with a tool to cast with. So if I was going into a fight and started throwing heals on myself, i'd run out of mana fairly quickly.

In short, I think we've limited ourselves enough with mana and regeants. Don't get me wrong, you should have to be wielding a wand or a staff to do the most potential damage or healing with magic, but you should still be able to do minor, less effective heals without one.

[Consume]

for anyone who doesn't agree with it, it's just sort of like saying i want to be able to fire a bow and do melee at the same time.

Glass Cannons ftw.

[Eternalsinner]

Potions and herbs fit into the healing category, in my opinion, but according to you, isn't there the possibility that i'll use them back-to-back, making me invulnerable?

His point is that regeants will limit you to how many times you can cast before you run out. I don't think you'd be able to scrounge up the resources to make all of them for a whole army.

We're also forgetting mana. It costs mana and regeants to cast most spells, along with a tool to cast with. So if I was going into a fight and started throwing heals on myself, i'd run out of mana fairly quickly.

In short, I think we've limited ourselves enough with mana and regeants. Don't get me wrong, you should have to be wielding a wand or a staff to do the most potential damage or healing with magic, but you should still be able to do minor, less effective heals without one.

I think most healing will be minor anyways, mostly all Heal over time spells.

[Jester814]

So... How will this effect paladin type templates? We are going to have to switch from sword/shield to staff/wand in order to heal ourselves and our allies?

[Eternalsinner]

So... How will this effect paladin type templates? We are going to have to switch from sword/shield to staff/wand in order to heal ourselves and our allies?

it seems that way and I think its the only way it could work in DFO. if they have even a handfull of spells/skills you dont NEED reagents and or required weapon stypes someone out there will make a viable build with all of them and run around naked killing people with nothing to lose if they die, but everything to gain if they succeed

[Kietharr]

How do you feel about it?

This is actually something I considered posting about but couldn't be arsed to do it. This ensures that I won't be playing a magic build unless they're REALLY good. I think that there should be a skill that lets you use any melee weapon as a wand that can cast most spells, but not the strongest ones. This really destroys the paladin/classic battlemage playstyle otherwise. I know, we don't know much about the balance of the game, but this seems pretty major to me, forcing hybrids to carry another weapon in addition to reagents and a melee weapon/shield seems a bit much.

Personally, I'm looking forward to more information on potions/alchemy, as I think potchucker would be an interesting playstyle.

[Jonkar]

...

It has been said not all spells require reagents. That likely means the basic spells, which will likely include healing.

Also, that you require reagents doesn't change anything. It'll just result into people stocking up a shitload of those reagents to keep themselves alive, so that's a bullshit argument.

[Estrang]

How do you feel about it?

Good, it's going to give a degree of seperation between magic users and melee.

[Nackl of Gilmed]

I too have an opinion on this topic with no knowledge of how it works in-game!

Too many unknown variables. Maybe switching to your weapon is easy. Maybe the speed at which you switch from wand to weapon depends on your weapon skill. Maybe the staff is a viable melee weapon and you only have to switch to some sort of combat 'stance'. Maybe that system also applies to the paladin with scepters (assuming prestige classes ever make it to the game). Maybe any mage worth his salt will have some sort of slowing spell, giving him time to switch to a melee weapon before the minotaur warriors reach him.

[Baal/Mrheat]

How do you feel about it?

As we need reagents to cast spells i think its a worthless idea....

[Eternalsinner]

all I know is you should absolutly NEED some sort of weapon/item equiped in order to use any type of spell or ability. you shouldnt be able to do anything, except throw fistacuffs in a pub, without some sort of weapon.

[LanMandragon]

I just hope I can train in staff fighting.

My fast casting melee mage is gonna own shit.

[Beorg]

It has been said not all spells require reagents. That likely means the basic spells, which will likely include healing.

Also, that you require reagents doesn't change anything. It'll just result into people stocking up a shitload of those reagents to keep themselves alive, so that's a bullshit argument.

I've considered that, but I haven't heard any word from Tasos on it yet, so I was excluding that fact.

You continue to ignore mana. It costs mana, regeants and a tool to cast--you couldn't continually heal yourself with regeants only.

[Jonkar]

I've considered that, but I haven't heard any word from Tasos on it yet, so I was excluding that fact.

You continue to ignore mana. It costs mana, regeants and a tool to cast--you couldn't continually heal yourself with regeants only.

So? It costs stamina to use your other weapons. Your point is invalid.

It costs arrows to shoot a bow.

You need to switch to a melee weapon or bow in order to use that fighting style. All your arguments are irrelevant.

[Eternalsinner]

As we need reagents to cast spells i think its a worthless idea....

you dont need reagents to cast ALL spells so it only makes sense, if they let people run around naked with even a 10% chance of killing me, even with a crappy beginner spell that requires no reagents, is the day this game loses all respect with the claims of accountability and risk vs reward.

[VenomKing666]

It has been said not all spells require reagents. That likely means the basic spells, which will likely include healing.

Also, that you require reagents doesn't change anything. It'll just result into people stocking up a shitload of those reagents to keep themselves alive, so that's a bullshit argument.

No because you will lose them if you die, and it's not like you are vulnerable when casting and it's not like these spells require aiming, so basically you cannot heal yourself. Also spells dosen't require mana, this never happened, what is mana ?

-

Seriously, while writing this I just found out the perfect idea.

Low level spells that dosent require reagents to cast should be casted without wands, but then it WOULD cost reagents. Otherwise, with a wand, no reagents required.

[Byggin]

and they probably will make it so that you can't change weapons then as well.

They will never do that. The game is all about freedom, for balance issues they have to put in things like needing a wand to cast, slower cast time with heavier armor, ect.

[Eternalsinner]

I've considered that, but I haven't heard any word from Tasos on it yet, so I was excluding that fact.

You continue to ignore mana. It costs mana, regeants and a tool to cast--you couldn't continually heal yourself with regeants only.

Your also forgetting stamina for melee characters. no stamina = no attacking. its an even playing field. you can cast from a distance so you need reagents. reagents are to your wand, just like an archer needs arrows to his bow.


crap... jonkar beat me to it.

[VenomKing666]

So? It costs stamina to use your other weapons. Your point is invalid.

It costs arrows to shoot a bow.

You need to switch to a melee weapon or bow in order to use that fighting style. All your arguments are irrelevant.

Well the thing is: A bow is a device to launch an arrow. Magic is some fictional kind of energy that you can channel to create things. Wands could be tools to help to channel this energy, same with reagents. See my other post.

[Beorg]

They will never do that. The game is all about freedom, for balance issues they have to put in things like needing a wand to cast, slower cast time with heavier armor, ect.


I've already said that I think they've balanced out magic already. With mana and regeants already, I don't think a catalyst should be necessary, but quite helpful in magical combat. But anyway, I pray that you are right. I could deal with switching to a wand during combat to heal. I was arguing on the basis that you cannot switch.

[Lachrymose]

yea, but i don't wanna use a wand! i'm supposed to look hardcore. how am i gonna do that looking like harry potter?? :(

no wands plx. :mad:

[Honorzeal]

It's a good thing.

Makes magic users need equipment like others.

Edit:
Also, I would love to see dual wieldable wands that I can use with a sword.

like Gandalf style? Staff/wand in one hand, sword in the other? :D

[Henu989]

like Gandalf style? Staff/wand in one hand, sword in the other? :D
Screw that!
If you let people 1 hand wield staffs I'm gonna go dual staff like Saruman.

[Xuen]

I think that those spells better fucking good if mages have to have reagents, mana AND a wand or staff!

[VenomKing666]

I think that those spells better fucking good if mages have to have reagents, mana AND a wand or staff!

ALso you gotta wear cloth or expect a longer casting time.

[Eternalsinner]

I think that those spells better fucking good if mages have to have reagents, mana AND a wand or staff!

your not really understanding the risk vs reward concept here.

archers need to use bows(wand for mage)arrows(reagents for mage)and stamina/mana for thier special attacks.

Melee use thier sword and shield or whatever, stamina, and also need a bow with arrows or throwing axes/daggers to do ranged damage. everything is on an even playing field.

[Jonkar]

No because you will lose them if you die, and it's not like you are vulnerable when casting and it's not like these spells require aiming, so basically you cannot heal yourself. Also spells dosen't require mana, this never happened, what is mana ?

Yes, you will lose them if you die. But that's just the point. It might take to long for you to die if you have a shitload of reagents to heal yourself with.

You can say here how heal's are only HOT's and supposed to be minor but the devs didn't put that shit in for no reason.

Also, mana is in. Before you post again in this thread, search for mana on darkfallinfo.com

It was even in the fairly recent dev journals.

Well the thing is: A bow is a device to launch an arrow. Magic is some fictional kind of energy that you can channel to create things. Wands could be tools to help to channel this energy, same with reagents. See my other post.

And in Darkfall's world, wands and staffs are devices required to channel magic.

Suck it.

[Xuen]

your not really understanding the risk vs reward concept here.

archers need to use bows(wand for mage)arrows(reagents for mage)and stamina/mana for thier special attacks.

Melee use thier sword and shield or whatever, stamina, and also need a bow with arrows or throwing axes/daggers to do ranged damage. everything is on an even playing field.

In most games stamina recharges 10 times faster than mana, and you only really run out in constant combat for an extended period of time. and then all you have to do is avoid attacks for a bit and your back on track. Reagents are going to be much more expensive than arrows, especially for the better spells. And, magic and archery are very different. they are going to make magic archery that can heal and do parlor tricks. The problem with balancing is that you cant directly compare classes like that. All the classes have to be different or there is no reason to even have classes. Besides, archers are tough and can wear heavier armor. Mages need to rely solely on their magic.

[Eternalsinner]

In most games stamina recharges 10 times faster than mana, and you only really run out in constant combat for an extended period of time. and then all you have to do is avoid attacks for a bit and your back on track. Reagents are going to be much more expensive than arrows, especially for the better spells. And, magic and archery are very different. they are going to make magic archery that can heal and do parlor tricks. The problem with balancing is that you cant directly compare classes like that. All the classes have to be different or there is no reason to even have classes. Besides, archers are tough and can wear heavier armor. Mages need to rely solely on their magic.

there arnt any classes, the idea is everyone can do what they want. if you want to run around in heavy armour with a 2 handed axe and still cast magic, you can. you just need a wand and reagents also. all archtypes are balanced in risk vs reward if you were to follow one stricktly. and how do you know reagents will be much more expensive? you stock up on reagents for 100 fireballs, and an archer could be stocking up on armor penetraiting arrows(which would cost more then normal arrows) and take prob double/triple the amount of arrows to kill someone compared to fireballs. also, running around wastes stamina, jumping wastes stamina, swinging a weapon wastes stamina. if the system they have in place is anything like shadowbanes...well basicly if you run out your completely fucked in every which way.

[Wisperer]

All the classes have to be different or there is no reason to even have classes. Besides, archers are tough and can wear heavier armor. Mages need to rely solely on their magic.

There are no classes, you can train any skills you want.
There are going to be spells that require just mana, and a staff/wand. Its just they are going to be minor spells. In the lore there are chants that buff you, the character had to equip his sword to use them tho.

Most spells will burn up reagents. How common are these?

Some spells don’t require reagents. For most of the ones that do, you can get them all over the world by harvesting, buy them at vendors, loot them, or you could build farms for higher outputs.
Is a staff/wand and reagents needed for healing spells as well?

You always need a wand or staff to cast, but some spells don’t require reagents. Other than spells for healing you can use potions, food, and resting to recover hit points.

[Calibos]

Yeah... if you needed to use a wand to cast magic, then why wouldn't someone just pick up a torch or a crossbow instead? How was magic invented in the first place? Some dick wanting to do everything the superfuckinghard way and miraculously stumbled on a little piece of magic wood? Stupid. Make wands increase the power of the spell to the point where it's far better to use with one, but don't take make them necessary.

holy crap, I was just thinking the exact same thing!

[Nexus]

I'm meh either way. Whatever works I guess.

[Eternalsinner]

holy crap, I was just thinking the exact same thing!

doesnt matter how stupid it seems, it has to be done that way. you need to have something to lose when you die. reagents isnt a viable argument.

[DaveDFF]

^^ /Agree. If everyone could heal the game would be neverending because no one would need to rely on a straight up buff/heal character in their group.

everyone can heal if they have the skill or a stack of potions.

[Baal/Mrheat]

you dont need reagents to cast ALL spells so it only makes sense, if they let people run around naked with even a 10% chance of killing me, even with a crappy beginner spell that requires no reagents, is the day this game loses all respect with the claims of accountability and risk vs reward.

u need reagents for ALL spells

[Eternalsinner]

u need reagents for ALL spells

no you dont. there a a semi recent dev quote stating not every spell requires regents but does require the use of a staff/wand.

[DaveDFF]

it seems that way and I think its the only way it could work in DFO. if they have even a handfull of spells/skills you dont NEED reagents and or required weapon stypes someone out there will make a viable build with all of them and run around naked killing people with nothing to lose if they die, but everything to gain if they succeed

I would expect that certain close up spells require focus and concentration so whilst casting or for a number of seconds during and after this you would be very vulnerable if near the fight .... and thats where the injured would be...!!!!!

focus concentration / equiping a wand/staff / readying reagents , can all be managed in such a way that a caster puts himself at real rick with close up magic. Focus items of value would sort it, some spells will be vocalised only I am sure of it a nice platinum holy symbol may do the job .

[Baal/Mrheat]

doesnt matter how stupid it seems, it has to be done that way. you need to have something to lose when you die. reagents isnt a viable argument.

Doubt u played UO then.

A mage will need all the equipment a melee character has.
The diffirence is melee has ONE weapon while a mage will have ALOT of diffirent reagents

[Baal/Mrheat]

no you dont. there a a semi recent dev quote stating not every spell requires regents but does require the use of a staff/wand.

well then its probably just a wand or a staff with a set amount of charges

[Eternalsinner]

well then its probably just a wand or a staff with a set amount of charges

....this game is not UO, its influenced by it, but not UO reincarnated. you people need to wake the fuck up. they said so themselves that wands are required to cast all spells and that not all spells require reagents.

[Eternalsinner]

Doubt u played UO then.

A mage will need all the equipment a melee character has.
The diffirence is melee has ONE weapon while a mage will have ALOT of diffirent reagents

a melee will never carry just one weapon unless he wants his face stomped in by an archer/mage. we cant just teliport to your location and start hitting your dumb ass for standing still. we have to carry ranged weapons and ammo, and most likely wands and reagens all the same in order to just buff ourselves.

[Beorg]

Yes, you will lose them if you die. But that's just the point. It might take to long for you to die if you have a shitload of reagents to heal yourself with.

You can say here how heal's are only HOT's and supposed to be minor but the devs didn't put that shit in for no reason.

Also, mana is in. Before you post again in this thread, search for mana on darkfallinfo.com

It was even in the fairly recent dev journals.



And in Darkfall's world, wands and staffs are devices required to channel magic.

Suck it.


You're losing my respect by the minute with posts like that, Jonkar.

[evoke]

Hard to comment on this since I haven't played the game and don't know how it plays. But it's pretty reasonable that you shouldn't be able to shoot aggressive spells with a shield + melee weapon out I guess.

I wonder if you can use a wand + shield though. Anyone know?

[Morcalivan7]

Reagents are more like arrows.
The Wand/Staff is the bow.

Where does the magic spells themselves come in? How 'bout robes?

[chrissonfire]

it will be kind of a nuisance to switch from a bow (or sword) to a wand to do magic, but I trust the Darkfall staff to make the right decisions. I suppose it will help balance things... =/

[thenuh]

solution: off-hand focus items!

[bobo-sap]

i thinks its fine for all damage spells but i dont want to have to switch from my bow to a staff to cast recall or some small buff spells

[Xuen]

I think I was unclear: by classes I meant general categories of skills, like melee, magic, healing, that sort of thing. If all the categories are replications of other categories with different animations and names, There isn't much of a point in having the different categories other than to give the illusion of control to the players. Each should be vastly different from the others. Magic should be more than just a duplicate of archery with cooler animations. The whole point of magic and casters, in most games anyway, is that they deal massive damage and have many useful spells at the expense of durability. And magic is further divided into even more categories which focus on different things. some don't even have the massive damage thing, but its is balanced by a very low durability and a complete reliance on magic. If you are out of mana, or reagents, or you lose you staff or wand, you are dead. all you can do is run. and your adversary can probably run faster than you. You have to monitor all those factors, while in the heat of battle. and you probably cant use the same reagents for everything, so you need to anticipate your needs in battle ahead of time. Plus it is expensive, especially for the very powerful spells. I just think that all this balances out having very powerful spells.

[HedraFan3030]

Archers req a bow and arrows, why shouldnt casters req a focus item and regs?

QFT yes, yes they should

[Kekshorts]

Keybind your wep and wand, that is all.

[Xzi]

Well I was hoping to use a combination of a 2H sword and spells, but it might still be possible if there is some sort of key mapping for instant weapon-swapping which can be used in combat.

[RavenialNoct]

The way I see it, it's a good thing. I like no pre-determined classes but I also like the "archetype" reasoning.

Why would anyone ever use a dagger instead of a gigantic sword?

A dagger can slip between cracks in the armor

A dagger is less noticeable

A dagger is faster

Why would anyone wear leather instead of covering themselves in steel?

Leather allows for more movement

Leather is less noticeable

Leather is faster


Obviously I'm looking to the theif archetype.

In this game though, unlike WoW\EQ\anything, it seems the logic is not

"I have chosen the Rogue class, this means I can wear up to leather, wield up to two daggers, and use stealth."

instead the logic here is

"I wear leather, wield two daggers, operate stealthily, I am a Rogue"

It's play ---> Name for that Playstyle

not

Name for a Playsytle ---> play


Therefore, if game lore says that in order to cast "Movement of the Bowel" you need to find and be holding the porcelain figurine, you are choosing a piece of equipment which dictates abilities. In this sense the game lore says dagger is simply the spell reagent for the spells "slash and stab".

This is based around "I imagine it makes sense that..." (as this is a fantasy world). I imagine its harder to remember\focus on spell words\complex thought patterns which require the recalling of ancient symbols\ (ie. spell casting) if you are wearing heavy, hot, protective armor.

"You can hear your breath reverberating within the helmet chamber as tiny threadlets of sweat weave themsleves between your eyes, slide down along your cheeks."

Another thing:

We are entering into adult characters. These are persona, illustrations of other lives, ourselves in other circumstances. We are using the games time frame in order to practice skills, but it seems important to remember that if my character is wearing heavy plate and wielding an axe as tall as he, that the physical training one would have had to go through up until that point in order to pull off such a feat "might" have gotten in the way of long hours pouring over books and reciting incantations in ancient tongue.

These limitations or class "archetypes" are really just making our characters more "real" by giving them a functional or feasible history from which to have come to us.

Therefore limitations are symbols, when I choose the porcelain figurine in my main hand as opposed to the dagger of goblin woe, I am effectively saying that this character spent years reciting the many versus of the plumbing manual of dark sorcery, he was not out learning to sneak along forest paths.

[Deja vu]

Is a staff/wand and reagents needed for healing spells as well?

You always need a wand or staff to cast, but some spells don’t require reagents. Other than spells for healing you can use potions, food, and resting to recover hit points.

it sounds to me like EVERY spell requires a wand. IMHO this is good cause it helps balance magic with archery. Archery needs a bow magic needs a wand, archery needs arrows magic (usially needs) reagents, Archery needs endurance magic needs Mana.

[Froed]

It's unecessary. I wanted to be able to heal myself or comrades in combat, but also fight like a warrior. I could have dealt with a slower casting time, or less healing effect, but making me switch to a wand or staff is something I can't do in the midst of combat--seeing as I don't want to, and they probably will make it so that you can't change weapons then as well. They could have implemented other restrictions to casting without a catalyst, or a damage or speed boost when you do use a staff or wand, but we will see how it fares in beta first.

I agree with this. But mostly I'm a Baldur's Gate nostalgist and I loved the way magic looked in that when cast with just plain hands. But I'm also silly. So blah.

[Deja vu]

if its possible I think Duel wielding a 1h weapon and a wand would be pretty effective for a hybrid (most characters)

[NeoNight]

I like the idea... you will have to switch your weapons to use spells.. which will make it somewhat harder to switch from melee to range and so on.

But then throw out Magic swordsmen/battle mages/paladin style characters. :bang: No melee weapon in hand while casting magic. Which could of worked by making magic less effective when cast with a melee weapon in hand; or making it so the magic skill wouldn't level up as fast as it would if you casted magic with a wand.

[Ebethil]

I think it's a good idea because it makes magic users depend on equipment like everyone else while at the same time making it more advantageous to really specialize in magic rather then switching weapons and wand back and forth.

[Bawlin]

Now that I think about it, I guess it is kind of a handicap for hybrids. Hopefully staves or whatever kind of weapon needed to cast spells will still be a viable melee weapon, or else that shuts out spells for primarily melee people.

[Xzi]

But then throw out Magic swordsmen/battle mages/paladin style characters. :bang: No melee weapon in hand while casting magic. Which could of worked by making magic less effective when cast with a melee weapon in hand; or making it so the magic skill wouldn't level up as fast as it would if you casted magic with a wand.

if its possible I think Duel wielding a 1h weapon and a wand would be pretty effective for a hybrid (most characters)
Yea...

[Beorg]

Now that I think about it, I guess it is kind of a handicap for hybrids. Hopefully staves or whatever kind of weapon needed to cast spells will still be a viable melee weapon, or else that shuts out spells for primarily melee people.


Perhaps you can wield a staff that doubles as a spear? :sly:

By the way, I like the quote from the Koran in your signature.

[Osirus]

I think it's a good idea ... along with magic users being required to carry a focus item of sorts, it also allows players to easily identify magic users as primary targets during battle.

[Byggin]

What is so bad about having your inventory out while your fighting and manually changing your weapon combo? I mean fuck I did it in DAOC, it was no problem.

[Cards]

if its possible I think Duel wielding a 1h weapon and a wand would be pretty effective for a hybrid (most characters)

I hope that is possible, that is what I am planning to do.

[Dullard]

Wait...

You're going to need a bow AND arrows for archery?!

[Dr Who]

Wait...

You're going to need a bow AND arrows for archery?!

I think that is the idea.

I hope to be able to carry a weapon in my right hand and a focus wand in my left hand.

[chrissonfire]

Wait...

You're going to need a bow AND arrows for archery?!

the idea of darkfall is that it's striving to be as much like real life as possible

...

with magic and elves though

and orks...

....

and

[Danielmoscow]

the idea of darkfall is that it's striving to be as much like real life as possible

...

with magic and elves though

and orks...

....

and

Go to sleep

[Dullard]

I think that is the idea.

I hope to be able to carry a weapon in my right hand and a focus wand in my left hand.
But I wanna duel-wield crossbows and never have to reload them, like in an action movie or something.

the idea of darkfall is that it's striving to be as much like real life as possible

...

with magic and elves though

and orks...

....

and
Sorry, I don't speak dolphin.

[Desperado[1G]]

I think it's perfect.

edit: and everyone complaining about it is a stupidhead

[Bofhus]

I like it

[bobo-sap]

another reason why its fail. I get killed and someone loots staff amoung other things. now i cant cast Recall. FAIL

they should make spells cast faster with a wand out, thats about it

[Nackl of Gilmed]

another reason why its fail. I get killed and someone loots staff amoung other things. now i cant cast Recall. FAIL

they should make spells cast faster with a wand out, thats about it

what do you mean, cast recall?

[Deja vu]

another reason why its fail. I get killed and someone loots staff amoung other things. now i cant cast Recall. FAIL

they should make spells cast faster with a wand out, thats about it

if it goes in like that I want to be able to shoot arrows with out needing a bow... may be a bow should only speed up the rate you fire arrows.



:bang:

[noxxer]

I agree that every skill needs to be tuned so that they are not used too efficiently without the proper training/skill, even in uo, you had to have your hands free to cast spells, or at least one hand free to drink a potion, only later did they add spellchanneling weapons.
This, forcing players to learn doing more than just swinging swords and clicking spells to survive, added a new dimension to skills.

In a sense I agree with this, but the argument with the regs and arrows isnt good, and in darkfalls case, it depends a lot on how they want the skills to be used. Risk vs reward.

It should be like -

Benefits of melee should be very situational, only if you are close and dosnt require and preparing, but taxing on stamina, puts you in danger, and requiring a weapon. But this is because it requires nothing else.

With arrows, you have very limited utility(fire/poison arrows and such), same as melee, but at a distance, arrows are required, but made out of wood and/or iron, that are not so hard to find. Weapon required.

then we get to the pure magic, with a LOT of utility and damage capabilities, both close up and at range, but reagents are required for each spell, are a lot rarer and armour penalties apply to casting, hand gestures required and syllables uttered, can be interrupted, requires more time to master and is divided into many schools.

And there should even exist more "primal" spells that do not require free hands, that cast on pure impulse, like a slight regenerative ability on a very high skill level, or maybe auras or debuffs, a lot less effective than the pure calculated magic but useful none the less in the right situations, could require reagents or preparations, and wouldn’t be nearly as effective as real magic.

They all have their benefits and drawbacks already, but then darkfall adds something that really isn’t necessary balance wise, Wands and staves.

Sure, if it’s about newbs having it more easy to run around "levelling" their skills without staffs because low lvl spells don’t require regs, yah, i get that.

But if it’s about skill to be able to swap weapons every other second to cast and jump around hitting your opponent, why can’t the two binds required be DISARM & ARM, instead of STAFF / SWORD, you are still required to perform the timing of the act and the cast time still applies, and can be lengthened.

As for the Lore part.

Like RevenialNoct, I don’t think it makes any sense how just someone stumbled onto some wood and suddenly figured out this was the material needed for magic, learned the syllables AFTER, and then magic evolved.
Unless the explanation is something lame like “A deity came down and showed them”.

Yes, I can agree that wands and staves could/should increase power of spells but making it a must for every spell is not much fun.

[noxxer]

if it goes in like that I want to be able to shoot arrows with out needing a bow... may be a bow should only speed up the rate you fire arrows.



:bang:

Yes, that is called Throwing. alot less effective, but it can be done..

[Deja vu]

Yes, that is called Throwing. alot less effective, but it can be done..

but that would Nerf damage and range not speed if any thing I would bet you could throw arrows faster (per arrow) than you could accurately shoot them

[Nackl of Gilmed]

Like RevenialNoct, I don’t think it makes any sense how just someone stumbled onto some wood and suddenly figured out this was the material needed for magic, learned the syllables AFTER, and then magic evolved.
Unless the explanation is something lame like “A deity came down and showed them”.

Yes, I can agree that wands and staves could/should increase power of spells but making it a must for every spell is not much fun.

The Chinese invented writing before they had paper. These days it would be completely unfeasible to write down the shopping list on a bamboo stalk, but that's how they started.

[noxxer]

but that would Nerf damage and range not speed if any thing I would bet you could throw arrows faster (per arrow) than you could accurately shoot them

Then I misread you, thought you meant "speed up the rate at which the arrows travel" thus increasing damage, not how many, how fast.

Well, on the point of wands/staves, its really all about how they balance/implement it, but if they really see the need for wands/staves, then hey.. ... .. Good for them...

As long as they give a good explanation lore/balance wise.. and not another just because it didn’t feel right.

[noxxer]

The Chinese invented writing before they had paper. These days it would be completely unfeasible to write down the shopping list on a bamboo stalk, but that's how they started.

Are you for or against me? since that argument really only supports my post, with Writing being the magic invented before, and paper being the tool that increases its uses, invented/found later.

My point is, that magic should first and foremost require regs, for all spells, after that, you could fine tune it with wands/staves.

You could have insert tree type here wands/staves that are better at channelling dry/fire magic, but less effective at water and moisture based magics, or wands/staves that draw upon your own life-force for better damage, the possibilities are endless..

[Danielmoscow]

I agree that every skill needs to be tuned so that they are not used too efficiently without the proper training/skill, even in uo, you had to have your hands free to cast spells, or at least one hand free to drink a potion, only later did they add spellchanneling weapons.
This, forcing players to learn doing more than just swinging swords and clicking spells to survive, added a new dimension to skills.

In a sense I agree with this, but the argument with the regs and arrows isnt good, and in darkfalls case, it depends a lot on how they want the skills to be used. Risk vs reward.

It should be like -

Benefits of melee should be very situational, only if you are close and dosnt require and preparing, but taxing on stamina, puts you in danger, and requiring a weapon. But this is because it requires nothing else.

With arrows, you have very limited utility(fire/poison arrows and such), same as melee, but at a distance, arrows are required, but made out of wood and/or iron, that are not so hard to find. Weapon required.

then we get to the pure magic, with a LOT of utility and damage capabilities, both close up and at range, but reagents are required for each spell, are a lot rarer and armour penalties apply to casting, hand gestures required and syllables uttered, can be interrupted, requires more time to master and is divided into many schools.

And there should even exist more "primal" spells that do not require free hands, that cast on pure impulse, like a slight regenerative ability on a very high skill level, or maybe auras or debuffs, a lot less effective than the pure calculated magic but useful none the less in the right situations, could require reagents or preparations, and wouldn’t be nearly as effective as real magic.

They all have their benefits and drawbacks already, but then darkfall adds something that really isn’t necessary balance wise, Wands and staves.

Sure, if it’s about newbs having it more easy to run around "levelling" their skills without staffs because low lvl spells don’t require regs, yah, i get that.

But if it’s about skill to be able to swap weapons every other second to cast and jump around hitting your opponent, why can’t the two binds required be DISARM & ARM, instead of STAFF / SWORD, you are still required to perform the timing of the act and the cast time still applies, and can be lengthened.

As for the Lore part.

Like RevenialNoct, I don’t think it makes any sense how just someone stumbled onto some wood and suddenly figured out this was the material needed for magic, learned the syllables AFTER, and then magic evolved.
Unless the explanation is something lame like “A deity came down and showed them”.

Yes, I can agree that wands and staves could/should increase power of spells but making it a must for every spell is not much fun.

I agree

[Bossman]

i think staffs/wands should increase power to the point where it would be stupid to cast without them, but you should still be able to...

take another PvP game for an example to see how non equipment related casting worked out:

in Meridian 59, my character's main weapon is the touch of flames spell, which shrouds my characters hands with flames, and does decent damage, and you cant use handheld weapons (sword, staff, mace, ect...) with the spell, and i coupled it with the blast of fire spell, which made a very strong magical melee attack, this was balanced by its reagent/mana cost, and the fact that touch wore off within a few minutes, requiring repeated casts, and blast was a one off attack, the costs for those reagents could quickly add up to more than a decent weapon, so while i had more damage, you just had to avoid getting blasted long enough for me to run out of mana, at which point im screwed, and i just wasted 300 gold worth of regs on a failed attempt to kill you...


if i am forced to use a staff/wand in DF, then i suppose we wont be seeing melee spells, and my melee mage just went down the shit hole


so my opinion: make staffs/wands give a HUGE boost in magical power, but allow us to cast without them.

[Jonkar]

You're losing my respect by the minute with posts like that, Jonkar.

Doesn't change the fact I'm right.

[Krogan]

I'm pretty sure its a combination of staffs/wands, trinkets/rings and regents. So I doubt all spell will require a staff or wand.

[Eternalsinner]

for the last time... its in a damn dev quote. you will need a wand equiped in order to cast spells. why cant you people understand that?

[noxxer]

for the last time... its in a damn dev quote. you will need a wand equiped in order to cast spells. why cant you people understand that?

that is such a worthless thing to say nowadays after the devs have changed their minds 100 times and quotes being outdated and really feaking vague..

[Morthor]

for the last time... its in a damn dev quote. you will need a wand equiped in order to cast spells. why cant you people understand that?

That means nothing. For all we know, he may have only been referring to the higher level spells or certain schools. It seems kinda stupid to make people change their weapons around constantly if they want to have a few spells.

[Jonkar]

that is such a worthless thing to say nowadays after the devs have changed their minds 100 times and quotes being outdated and really feaking vague..

That means nothing. For all we know, he may have only been referring to the higher level spells or certain schools. It seems kinda stupid to make people change their weapons around constantly if they want to have a few spells.

Dear gentlemen,

Enjoy these dev quotes from the last two Q&A's.

Is a staff/wand and reagents needed for healing spells as well?

You always need a wand or staff to cast, but some spells don’t require reagents. Other than spells for healing you can use potions, food, and resting to recover hit points.

10. Will magic require players to carry around a wand/staff to use spells?
Yes players need to carry a wand or a staff, and the components to cast their spells. Very few spells don't require components.



Do you feel stupid yet?

[Blixa]

that is such a worthless thing to say nowadays after the devs have changed their minds 100 times and quotes being outdated and really feaking vague..


That means nothing. For all we know, he may have only been referring to the higher level spells or certain schools. It seems kinda stupid to make people change their weapons around constantly if they want to have a few spells.


Originally posted by: Darkfall Journal, 2nd July 2008


Is a staff/wand and reagents needed for healing spells as well?

You always need a wand or staff to cast, but some spells don’t require reagents. Other than spells for healing you can use potions, food, and resting to recover hit points.

Always - Wand - Cast

What's so hard to understand about it?

[noxxer]

Dear gentlemen,

Enjoy these dev quotes from the last two Q&A's.


Do you feel stupid yet?

soo, how does that change the points made for or against wands/staves?
a quote dosnt change shit, and im actually dissapointed anoyone would bring them up, since i remember a lot of people bringing up quotes on farming the months following its removal, and got wtfpwned when it was reinstated..

please, let us stick to arguments for/against wands/staves, and not, lick dev bum.

And such a small feature as having a check to see if you are weilding a wand to be able to cast a spell is very easy to change and can dissapear whenever if the need arises.

[Jonkar]

soo, how does that change the points made for or against wands/staves?
a quote dosnt change shit, and im actually dissapointed anoyone would bring them up, since i remember a lot of people bringing up quotes on farming the months following its removal, and got wtfpwned when it was reinstated..

please, let us stick to arguments for/against wands/staves, and not, lick dev bum.

And such a small feature as having a check to see if you are weilding a wand to be able to cast a spell is very easy to change and can dissapear whenever if the need arises.

What? Are you a schizo or something? You're the one that comes in here, saying dev quotes don't mean shit anymore because their old and vague. I simply press a dev quote from a month or two ago so far up your ass that there's no ignoring it.

Hypocrisy ftw.

[noxxer]

-"that is such a worthless thing to say nowadays after the devs have changed their minds 100 times and quotes being outdated and really freaking vague.."

Let me rephrase that since a lot of people just go on pure impusle when reading something that they can "stick to" someone..

*Bringing up the developers statements is not a good argument because as proven, they have changed their opinions on many occasions and sometimes are very vague on their points, and with a lot of the site being outdated many other quotes become uncertain. So, not necessarily saying this one being outdated, vague and wrong, but can be proven to be on a later date.
So what I want to say is, to be constructive, we should only go on what we think.

Stopping the arguments with "devs say so" is plain stupid IMO.

I am here to discuss ideas on how they can be improved and if some are really necessary, not to drool over the almighty infallible developers who possibly couldnt miss something or have a bad idea. Wether the ideas get read or not i dont give a rats as, just as long as they get put out there.

[Blixa]

So far I haven't seen any valid points for not having to carry wands. Also, there isn't anything to discuss since we don't know one very important thing: How long will it take to swap weapons/When can you swap weapons (although I assume always).

If you can always swap your weapons and you only need 1-2 seconds to swap your weapons, your bitching really has no sense. I prefer 4-5 seconds to shift your weapon and at least 10 seconds to swap your whole armor. If that'd not be implented, nearly every meele/ranged player will take 1/3 healing spells and heal himself/allies if needed. It'd destroy the balance.

[Blixa]

-"that is such a worthless thing to say nowadays after the devs have changed their minds 100 times and quotes being outdated and really freaking vague.."

Let me rephrase that since a lot of people just go on pure impusle when reading something that they can "stick to" someone..

*Bringing up the developers statements is not a good argument because as proven, they have changed their opinions on many occasions and sometimes are very vague on their points, and with a lot of the site being outdated many other quotes become uncertain. So, not necessarily saying this one being outdated, vague and wrong, but can be proven to be on a later date.
So what I want to say is, to be constructive, we should only go on what we think.

Stopping the arguments with "devs say so" is plain stupid IMO.

Telling other people to bring arguments without bringing own arguments while you yourself try to change something is plain stupid IMO.

Also, the quote will never be outdated (if DF really comes out this year) or vague (since it's a clear statement: "You always need a wand or staff to cast").

[Curcio]

I hope it isn't fully requires for ALL spells. Even though I will probably use a staff anyways.

[Blixa]

I hope it isn't fully requires for ALL spells. Even though I will probably use a staff anyways.

"You always need a wand or staff to cast" from a DEV-Q/A (the last one)

OnTo: There could still be first aid/herbals, just don't expect it to work as well as real heals spells (who should be limited to real healers. If you're a meele, you have to live with the disadvantages as well)

[coder1024]

I bet you'll be able to map a key to quick swap your weapons in and out. So you swap to wand, heal, swap to 2H hammer, crush :)

[Lorthral]

I'm going wand for the sole reason that I can dual-wield a dagger with it.

[Jonkar]

Jezus christ, it's amazing how many people have a reading comprehension.

Anyway,

So far I haven't seen any valid points for not having to carry wands. Also, there isn't anything to discuss since we don't know one very important thing: How long will it take to swap weapons/When can you swap weapons (although I assume always).

If you can always swap your weapons and you only need 1-2 seconds to swap your weapons, your bitching really has no sense. I prefer 4-5 seconds to shift your weapon and at least 10 seconds to swap your whole armor. If that'd not be implented, nearly every meele/ranged player will take 1/3 healing spells and heal himself/allies if needed. It'd destroy the balance.

I hope it takes time to swap weapons too. It only makes sense if it's required for wands/staffs too. Don't get me wrong there.

[longclaw]

Very Very Bad.

[Blixa]

Very Very Bad.

I laughed at that one, don't know why though. Probably because of the ovbious "+1" purpose.

[Largion]

Why cant we just wait and see?
:rolleyes:

[VenomKing666]

Also, mana is in. Before you post again in this thread, search for mana on darkfallinfo.com

It was even in the fairly recent dev journals.


Oh because you tought I was serious here ?

Anyway, about the healing, I think that you should be able to kill someone faster when slashing the shit out of him then HIM healing himself.

[Jonkar]

Oh because you tought I was serious here ?

Anyway, about the healing, I think that you should be able to kill someone faster when slashing the shit out of him then HIM healing himself.

Agreed.

[Eternalsinner]

Oh because you tought I was serious here ?

Anyway, about the healing, I think that you should be able to kill someone faster when slashing the shit out of him then HIM healing himself.

well as far as we know the majority of healing spells are HoTs. so I dont think someone can just heal themselves infinitly and not die.

[Xuen]

On the point of "how did people discover magic if you need a wand?"

They could have recognized the mana within them selves, and with some research, realized That power needed to be channeled. so they pick up a stick and channel their energy into it and then 'OMG that trees on fire!!!". Then they experimented with different types of wood till they found the magical type.

[Deja vu]

arguments for or against needing wands are pretty pointless at this point.

The devs have all ready said that you will need them and I doubt they will change there mind cause a lot of people who haven't even tested out the game yet don't like having wands to cast spells.