Official Shadow/Wall of Fire Feedback thread. - PLEASE KEEP ALL DISCUSSION HERE.

[GrayOldDruid]

Now THAT is some good thinking and creative solutions. Enemies move out of the way when hurt? What a concept.

I liked the whole idea of a little damage or something and they did make the flaming sphere where it will hurt or more actually annoy players as well. I ran with it a little bit, then dropped the spell because it annoyed me so much to have this constant "save" and stuff going on with the thing rolling around. Something like that, where there is no real massive damage, just a "I should not be standing near that thing" would be good for AoEs too.

"STOP casting burning hands at me!!" "Stop running in front of my Burning Hands spell.... "

Quarion, you missed my thread on this subject which I think has some decent ideas contained in it although it's not gotten as many responses as some others. Here it is:

http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?t=125085


(I hope I did that right, never linked anything before)


Anyway, in the meantime, here here are my own (slightly edited for context) posts from the thread:

I'm writing this after reading in the general forums that certain shadows have been given a blanket immunity to wall of fire (presumably & co.) for balance reasons. Like many players, I am inclined to call this change, for lack of a better term, "cheese."

Going forward, it seems simple to me that you should have your NPCs fight magic with magic. Why should those shadows need to be immune to fire? Aren't their high CR vampires in the quest? Have them cast Break Enchantment on our Walls of Fire, or throw up a Globe of Invulnerability when engaged. The fights will be more difficult, and you won't have an angry player base accusing you of cheating.

That's not enough? No problem. Code your Walls of Fire as targettable entities (like Flaming Sphere) and make them extinguishable by things like Ice Storm or Cone of Cold.

I understand that the quest was far too easy with Max/empowered wall of fire (as is the case in a great many places, btw), but your solution is a poor one. In fact, in retrospect, I think your decision to put Wall of Fire into the game was likely a poor one. It is simply too powerful relative to other spells, and borders often on game breaking, but I'm sure it's too late to remove it now, so do something interesting to bring it in line - make it counter-able - as opposed to just tossing out immunities where none should exist.

Beyond that, give some thought to the (often repeated) suggestion that mobs be scripted to move out of damaging lingering AOEs. There need only be distinction between effects on a mob between environmental effects and applied duration effects. IE whenever a mob takes dmg, if it's source is tagged as "environmental" (a la Wall of Fire) it will make an effort to move out of it, or at least have that affect its behaviour in some manner (ie, Ouch it burns here! I'm gonna whack that other guy over there instead).

I really hope that you guys read this and consider, if not these, then some other options for dealing with this sort of problem.



I just want to point out that I'm not saying any of these are perfect as stated, but rather trying to encourage discussion of viable options to "make them immune."

I agree with those of you who say we can't just give them a simple "it burns get out" script, for the reasons you posted. However, as sad as it is, I think that would probably be better than what we have now - which is of course - "Ow that hurts, I'll stand here and die in seconds, to no good effect." At least, if they ran out of it and we had to kill them with range, it would take longer - haha. What I would suggest is a slightly more complex script that would have the mobs react differently, perhaps based on archetype. Casters would move out and attempt to dispel 'environment' effects. Mellees would shift agro based on relative distance from the "Owie," and rangers would of course retreat to range, as they more or less do.

Other options exist too of course. For example, Metamagic enhancements could be disabled for Wall of Fire. As the spell, per PnP is effectively a form of crowd control and not a damage dealing magic, this could be justified I think. Maybe in this case make it into an object again like a Flaming Sphere, or something, and have it 'pulse' an antipathy effect which the mobs would have to save against in order to build the nerve to pass through.

Just some more thoughts, do you agree? disagree? Come on guys, let's give the devs some conversation here, because it's pretty obvious by now that Max/emp walls of fire are getting out of control.

[Tolki]

Making PC's susceptible to "friendly fire" is not a bad idea; However, it would take a lot of changes to make that a workable method of play. First, spell ranges would have to be extended. I mean currently it's almost suicidal for a MU/Sorc to cast firewall. The aggro brought on with the spell is insane. And the fighter types with uber hit points are all running around trying to increase their kill counts, instead of defending the spellcaster. Extend the distance the spell can be cast and that might allow the fighter types to get in between the caster and the monster. Unlike firewall flame strike is a divine spell. That means the cleric's diety is providing half the damage and magical energy is supplying the other. Therefore, a party friendly to the cleric "could" only be in danger of half or no damage depending upon saves. Providing the cleric's diety is paying attention. As the game is currently set up, clerics are support party members not attack casters. A flame strike should be considered to a defensive attack spell. Not a spell to be thrown around like a fireball. Flame strike should be a "better do something quick or we're all dead" spell, not an opening attack move. I know the so called "battle clerics" might balk at this notion, but maybe they should be looking in to playing paladins instead of a cleric. However, the idea of friendly fire damage does have merits in my opinion, but just remember Newton's laws apply here. For every change there is equal and opposite change that takes place. Currently a 14th level fighter can have uber hit points, 300-500. While all the other chrs in a party still have the original D&D rules hit points. A creature that is challenging for a fighter type is terminal for other classes. That may be why we see less clerics, spellcasters, and rogues and more people playing fighter types or combination fighter/other class. Just look at the looking for party members, Clerics are in high demand. Why, no one wants to play them.

[bnrilfun]

I dont see a problem at all turning on FF if they make it so mobs who cast spells that are AOE can get affected by them too.

Right now bad guys dont get hurt by traps. That would have to change.

They cast all sorts of AOE spells and are immune to any negative affects such as Glitter dust, CloudKill, Comet Fall, blade barrier.

I would have no problem is the Demon queen died because she ran through her blade barriers to attack us. That would make things fine with me.

Just quit making a mob immune to everything so that we have to melee everything only. Make them not trainable to one key area. Swap them out to a mob that is actually fire resistant. Add water to the room so firewall doesnt burn as good.

Quit being lazy.

Final note, if you are going to make a mission tougher, that is fine, then quit crapping out the loot.

Temple of Vol was a great loot run, then they realized how easy it was to farm, ok lower the loot tables a little not by a mile.

Then when you make it tough again you raise back the loot tables to what they were so we earn what we fought for.

People wont complain about changes as much if the reward is equal the challenge.

[Alexander_Illusioni]

Addressing the Shadow/ Firewall issue I see two major issues.

First is, should the dungeon be made harder? It should have IMO, but this is what Risia is for. There were numerous posts about the content being too easy in Risia. Some of it seemed "over exagerated", but obviously the general concensus was the the Desecrated Temple of Vol needed to be changed. The time to do this IMO is before release, not an adjustment after release! It is ok to have a few very easy dungeons, especially for one class (mages in this instance). That is what can make the game fun. One dungeon easy for mages, another for fighters, is not a bad mix. Gives each group a feeling of being the super hero. Fun easy loot runs, are what many in the game enjoy (I am not one of those) so let them have it. People who loot run will do it regardless of if it takes them an extra 5 minutes to do the quest or not. IMO once the content is released, it should not be changed simply because the player base has found a way to complete it easily. This will simply happen every time new content comes out. There will always be the easiest dungeon at X level that will be loot run.

The second issue is making the shadows immune to firewalls. Firewalls by nature are suppose to do double damage to undead. Even Blackbones are only suppose to be "resistant" to firewall. Making shadows immune, makes as much sense as making Ice Mephits immune to firewalls. If you want to make a dungeon harder, and do not like one tactic used throughout the dungeon (which I can understand), then change the mix of monsters more. It would be better to add more clay golems in the quest or other constucts, or even fire mephits. Blanket immunities are never a good idea.

Is firewall overused? Of course it is, because it is the only decent AoE spell you have given mages, just like blade barriers are overused. In this dungeon, blade barriers can be used just as firewalls have been. Just my opinions! If it was my game I would put it back like it was, and add a few fire mephits or fire elementals into the mix.

[CSFurious]

it is called the squelch list

first, it is sort of hard to group with someone when you cannot communicate in the first place

second, just look at your squlech list sometimes & you will remember who not to group with

It's a fine idea...

BUT ONLY IF the devs would add an enemies (Never_Group_With) list mechanic.

We would need a way to easily add names to this list, and people on the list would show up on our LFM group lists with big red letters or something.

[The_Truth]

Sure, this is great and realistic. But what about fighters? When they swing that sword should all else be ducking or that vorpal will sever their heads?
Maybe that Great shadow sword will crit for 150 pt of damage and kill the caster or cleric. Also, this change would also need to implement enemies dying in their own firewalls or BB. Yes, this is more realistic but of course it does not make sense in game play. I think its just another pot shot at people trying nerf casters.

[Aspenor]

Friendly fire is not the answer.

Mob AI adjustments and spellcasting habits need to be fixed to compensate for AoE damage. Spellcasters should dispel firewalls, not run through them or stand in them.

[stonecircle]

I agree with the original poster and see the lack of "friendly fire" to be the one aspect of this game that knocks everything out of whack. It makes all PnP rules obsolete. I'll also say that I dont have a solution to the griefing possibility, but I think it would be less then you think.

Casters who griefed others would eventually be blacklisted, and to make it to level 14 this way would be tedious for them. As far as Im concerned "firewall" is griefing now, because all it does is make melee run around chasing caster aggroe. Casters waste spell points and make melee do alot of waiting around. Then they expect us to wait while they recall out of the dungeon for more sp.

Firewall has single-handedly ruined every new quest that comes out, quickly turning everything into a zerg loot fest. Everyone seems to be nothing more then a "loot *****" these days.

[Kerr]

Right now bad guys dont get hurt by traps. That would have to change.

Of course they do. Have you never pulled the clerics in the TR quest into that spinning blade trap? I love kiting enemies through their own trap with Evasion and a high enough save that it takes a 1 to get hit by it. Watching the little buggers get killed on their on machine is a great joy.

[Alexander_Illusioni]

Now THAT is some good thinking and creative solutions. Enemies move out of the way when hurt? What a concept.

Great, so now mages cast firewall and no monsters come into it. Safe spot for mages and rangers to pick everyone off from. Hmmm... that does not seem to work right either! I do not think the solution will be easy to code into the AI of the mobs, no matter what you want to do.

[Aspenor]

Of course they do. Have you never pulled the clerics in the TR quest into that spinning blade trap? I love kiting enemies through their own trap with Evasion and a high enough save that it takes a 1 to get hit by it. Watching the little buggers get killed on their on machine is a great joy.

Mobs are hurt by traps when the devs feel it is appropriate. In other cases, they are immune.

[MysticTheurge]

Friendly fire is not the answer.

Mob AI adjustments and spellcasting habits need to be fixed to compensate for AoE damage. Spellcasters should dispel firewalls, not run through them or stand in them.

Aside from dispelling (since that's not available to every enemy in every quest) what's the AI solution to Persistent AoE spells that takes into consideration that fact that PCs can stand in or run through those same spells without consequence?

[TommyBoy]

Devs maybe you should WWC for a 3.5 monster Manual

exerpt from 3.5 Monster Manual pages 221

Shadow
This creature seems to be nothing but a patch of mobile gloom, more or less humanoid in shape.

Shadows are creatures of sentient darkness, hating life and light with equal fervor. Thier touch bestows the painful chill of nonexistence, making then very dangerous opponents.
A shadow can be difficult to see in dark or gloomy areas but stands out starkly in brightly illuminated places.
Natural enemies of all that live, shadows are aggressive and predatory. They are quick to strike and make short work of those unprepared to deal with them.
A shadow is 5 to 6 feet tall and weightless.
Shadows cannot speak intelligibly.

Combat
Shadows lurk in dark places, waiting for living prey to happen by.
Strength Damage (SU): The touch of a shadow deals 1d6 points of Strength damage to a living foe. A creature reduced to Strength 0 by a shadow dies. This is a negative energy effect.

Shadow
Medium Undead (Incorporeal)
Hit Dice: 3d12(19hp)
Initiative: +2
Speed: Fly 40 ft. (good) (8 squares)
Armor Class: 13(+2 Dex, +1 deflection), touch 13, flat-footed 11
Base Attack/ Grapple: +1/-
Attack: Incorporeal touch +3 melle (1d6 Str)
Full Attack: Incorporeal touch +3 melle (1d6 Str)
Space/ Reach: 5ft./ 5 ft.
Special Atacks: Create spawn, strength damage
Special Quallities: Darkvision 60ft., incorporeal traits, +2 turn resistance, undead traits
Saves: Fort +1, Ref +3, Will +4
Abilities: Str-, Dex 14, Con-, Int 6, Wis 12, Cha 13
Skills: Hide +8*, Listen +7, Search +4, Spot +7
Feats: Alertness, Dodge
Environment: Any
Organization: Solitary, gang(2-5), or swarm (6-11)
Treasure: None
Alignment: Always chaotic evil
Level Adjustment: -

Exerpt end

I don't see were being fire immune is listed.

[MysticTheurge]

I don't see were being fire immune is listed.

You must've missed this portion of the book:

Adding Special Abilities

You can add any sort of spell-like, supernatural, or extraordinary ability to a creature. As with a class level, you should determine how much, or how little, this ability adds to the creature’s existing repertoire. A suite of abilities that work together should be treated as a single modifier for this purpose. If the ability (or combination of abilities) significantly increases the monster’s combat effectiveness, increase its CR by 2. Minor abilities increase the creature’s CR by 1, and truly trivial abilities may not increase CR at all. If the special abilities a monster gains are not tied to a class or Hit Die increase, this CR increase stacks.

A significant special attack is one that stands a good chance of incapacitating or crippling a character in one round. A significant special quality is one that seriously diminishes the monster’s vulnerability to common attacks. Do not add this factor twice if a monster has both special attacks and special qualities.

Make sure to "scale" your evaluation of these abilities by the monster’s current CR.

[TommyBoy]

Your right I didnt see that. But would Fire immunity not increase the shadows cr by 2 then?

[MysticTheurge]

Your right I didnt see that. But would Fire immunity not increase the shadows cr by 2 then?

It probably should. But since CR means nothing in DDO except as a general concept, it doesn't really matter. All increasing the CR would do is let people know that they're harder (as opposed to in D&D where it would mean more XP for defeating them). People already know that.

[paintedman]

two deaths due to zerging, one more from massive pulling. leader asked that I mem acid aoe spells, good to go.

The idea of blanket immunities is a poor stop gap measure to be sure, but the outcry about it is a bit much. This did not break the quest. I say give the devs good feed back, an option or two and see what they come back with. Usually they eventually listen, sometimes they don't but overall the game has not become broken, just has a low ceiling.

-paintedman

[MrWizard]

my chaotic evil caster would has wet dreams about aoe and other spells affecting everyone...

I can easily destroy the whole party with a fireball anytime I wanted...

Palt farmers, dead....... annoying paladin, dead...needlemeyer, dead!

TOGA, TOGA, TOGA....

/ good idea on paper, end of DDO in reality

[Lorien_the_First_One]

I don't see were being fire immune is listed.

You missed appendix B of the DMG and I quote:

Appendix B:ALTERNATE RULES FOR IMAGINATIVE AND DIM WITTED DMs

Since being creative will be too hard for you and you will become frustrated when players take advantage of your poor dungeon design, get back at them by breaking the rules whenever it gives you a warm fuzzy feeling to do so.

Also fun is to give them special abilities, magical items, and enhancments that give them two or three times the firepower they should have according to the rules. Now they will like you for this but of course they might then kill your monsters. In revenge for using what you gave them you should give huge random bonsuses to saves and HP to the monsters, as well as adding random new abilities and immunities for them, so that the players can no longer use the abilities and items you gave them.

When they complain about eithe rof the above, give them new abilities to overcome the problems you created, and then if they use the new new abilities and items make sure you also create new counter rules so they can't use them either.

By your third gaming night you will probably need all new players, but hey, that means you just start again from scratch so this time you have to path all planned out

[Bogenbroom]

I have to agree that fire immunity of Shadows isn't really a great idea. It seems counter intuitive at the very leasts. Add to that the general population is VERY sensitive to the immunities issue. Especially when the immunities on a creature don't really mesh with that creatures nature.

And especially on undead. Undead already have a range of benefits that make them annoying enemies to many folks.

A couple of thoughts...

If the baddies had a caster spamming Fire Protection... the uproar would vanish almost completely. That is an easy logical jump for us to make. AoE protection/resistance spells would make that work a lot better (and would be nice for us as well. ) The concept isn't too far off, considering there are casters in game healing their tanks.

Also, persistent damaging spells need some additional variety. There are no persistently damaging spells other than fire and acid. Positive and Negative energy REALLY need to be represented. Those are energy types that have very little representation in the spell base as it is. Heal/Harm type spells excepted of course.

Just some thoughts.