Spell Costs: Sorcs should be Nukers, not DPS!

[Gorbadoc]

Beware of Falling Costs
Spell point costs are being reduced on many nuke spells (see quote below). One of the given reasons: Wizard and Sorcerer are difficult classes for newer players. My concern is that the arcane classes risk becoming brutish ranged DPS, rather than patient, calculating, ranged killers.

The Purpose of Wizards and Sorcerers
Wizards should be hard to play. There, I said it. Flavor-wise, wizards should have devastating arcane power, but limited uses per rest and limited survivability. Kill any monster, but choose wisely, because you can't kill them all. Mind whom you zap and where you stand, because you're not built to survive a counterattack.

Keeping the Game Fun
Even if he is a glass cannon with limited ammo, though, the wizard needs something to do in the small fights, or he'll feel like a piece of luggage. The way the system works now, we do have the oddity of wizards with great axes at low levels. Then they hit level 7, and the new oddity is that they use Wall of Fire for nearly everything. The reductions in spell point costs are meant to treat both oddities, a fact which I applaud.

Nuke Spam!
My concern, and the reason I'm writing, is that the devs might take this too far. Part of the fun of playing a wizard (or sorcerer) is that I can't throw nuke spells constantly. Sure, I can demolish a single fight, but I have to pick and choose where best to apply my arcane powers. This is particularly true at level 6; at this point, I have okay spell points and a decent variety of nukes to choose from, but I don't yet have Wall of Fire to cheese with.

If nukes cost too little, this will go away, especially for sorcerers (with their larger SP pools). Even in a party of six, I'll be able to spam nukes until everything is dead, and never mind whether I'm using spells on a key target. In short, sorcerers may become a sustained DPS class rather than a nuke class. Please, Devs, be careful; don't take these cost reductions too far!


For anyone unfamiliar, here's the snippet that has the devs' reasoning:

SPELL COST TO EFFECT RATIOS CHANGES:

For years now the cost of all spells have been strictly driven by this formula:

Base Spell cost = 5 SP + (spell level X 5).

IE: a level 1 spell is 10 sp, while a level 9 spell is 50 sp, and so forth.

While we got by with this, it didn’t exactly always make for the most diverse spell choices for those people who crunched the numbers to determine what to use. When you looked at the math, folks get very attached to certain spells, namely “wall of fire” for very logical reasons. This is a shame considering the art/dev resources devoted to the creation of so many other spells also floating in the system.

On another note, it has become a noticeable point that arcane casters are a rather difficult class to get into. The Classic 3.5 D&D concept of starting weak then gain cosmic power. While loyal to our roots we felt that perhaps the current learning curve is a bit too harsh, and we’re looking at making it an easier class role to enter for new players.

[dkyle]

[color=yellow]If nukes cost too little, this will go away, especially for sorcerers (with their larger SP pools). Even in a party of six, I'll be able to spam nukes until everything is dead, and never mind whether I'm using spells on a key target. In short, sorcerers may become a sustained DPS class rather than a nuke class. Please, Devs, be careful; don't take these cost reductions too far!

While base spell costs have gone down, an important thing to remember is that metamagics have not gone down in cost.

While a caster can now spam the base spell somewhere around 3 times more often than before, most casters don't cast base spells past around level 6.

A Max Empowered Fireball will not cost much less than before, especially if it is also Heightened and Quickened.

So: casters can now do low-level damage more frequently, but encounter-ending Nukes will still cost quite a bit.

[Gorbadoc]

So: casters can now do low-level damage more frequently, but encounter-ending Nukes will still cost quite a bit.

That's my hope. I'll have to see it in game to be convinced one way or other. Meanwhile, two things bother me:

1) The fact that Torc explains why SP costs should go down but doesn't mention why they shouldn't go down more.

2) The fact that DDO has seen the addition of many "easy" buttons over the years. Spells need work, but in fixing the them, it would be so easy for the devs to overshoot at turn damage spells into another easy button.

I'm hoping the devs understand the risk of making arcanes into a "pew pew" class. Torc didn't mention it, though, so I'm mentioning it now.

[kyleann]

I'm hoping the devs understand the risk of making arcanes into a "pew pew" class. Torc didn't mention it, though, so I'm mentioning it now.

It's more like "pew pew pew pew pew" (magic missiles) or "KA PEWWWW" (fireball) or "....PEW" (fire trap or DBF)

The point made earlier about choosing your targets wisely is great! If we allow sorc and wiz to pew pew endlessly without worrying about SP it sort of trivializes the gameplay. It's supposed to be a team effort, with those who can range taking out the most dangerous enemies before the front line gets hammered.

I hope they don't keep lowering the difficulty level of playing all the classes otherwise all we'll have is WoW with muuuuuuuuch better graphics (and less Chuck Norris, at least at first).

[learst]

Beware of Falling Costs
My concern is that the arcane classes risk becoming brutish ranged DPS, rather than patient, calculating, ranged killers.

Why is this a problem?

And maybe I'm looking too much into this statement, but are you implying that the rest of the classes are brutish DPS? Are AA no less calculating or discerning when to use the bow? Are fighters and monks no less calculating when using their special attacks?

If the intent for arcanes is to be only patient and calculating, why do sorcerors have more SP and less spell choices. Even in their class description - they are able to cast less spells, but more often.

The Purpose of Wizards and Sorcerers
Wizards should be hard to play. There, I said it. Flavor-wise, wizards should have devastating arcane power, but limited uses per rest and limited survivability.

Personally I think monks are hardest to play, or any class/builds that require a multiple key smashing, combo, hotkeys etc etc.

Keeping the Game Fun
Even if he is a glass cannon with limited ammo, though, the wizard needs something to do in the small fights, or he'll feel like a piece of luggage. The way the system works now, we do have the oddity of wizards with great axes at low levels. Then they hit level 7, and the new oddity is that they use Wall of Fire for nearly everything. The reductions in spell point costs are meant to treat both oddities, a fact which I applaud.

Agreed, that was what the low SP regen is supposed to help with.

Nuke Spam!
If nukes cost too little, this will go away, especially for sorcerers (with their larger SP pools). Even in a party of six, I'll be able to spam nukes until everything is dead, and never mind whether I'm using spells on a key target. In short, sorcerers may become a sustained DPS class rather than a nuke class. Please, Devs, be careful; don't take these cost reductions too far!

I think your fears are unwarranted, for now. Running Amrath quests or end-game quests, casters need to be really careful with their SP or it will run out pretty quickly. Right now, I don't see the spell cost reduction to be so drastic that they are able to keep spamming spells mindlessly.

Comments in red

[HarveyMilk]

Remember, saves are going up now (in epics). So, with the exception of the very long cooldown Power Word: Kill, casters will need to have some level of gear now to hit their spells with saves.

I'm betting it'll go like this (and I'd love to hear other people's thoughts bc I don't play my casters very often, so I know someone else here will have more insight than I will):

Sorc savants will leave their metas on all the time to spam their sla's, and they'll toss in normal spells when they need higher dmg or burst.

Evocation archmage wizzies will prob keep all their metas on also.

Everyone else has more difficult decisions to make.

When Lama goes live, we'll know a lot more.

[MsEricka]

In my opinion, it depends on what you mean by "nuking".

To me, nuking means doing large amounts of damage which is the same as DPS. On the other hand I know some people who refer to nuking as instant kills (finger, Wail, PK and even destruction).

So saying that, yes I do want my sorc to continue to be DPS. However if that's what you call nuking then that's what I want to be.

My Wizard is what I would consider the finesse build out of the two. I mass hold the mobs from a distance and mitigate party damage. Then I hypno mobs that are not near the melee to control them and wait to hold them. While I'm doing this I set up dancing balls in case anything breaks loose. The wizard hasn't done a single tick of damage, and yet the party is alive, the mobs are dead and the healers are happy.

I'm currently making a wiz/rogue to go pew pew pew just for the entertainment, but that's intentional and already nerfed by me

[herzkos]

sometime in the distant past i posted my theory on the difference between wizzys and sorcs but
here it is again.
sorcs are best played tactically. they use their spells on a mob to mob or encounter to encounter
basis.
wizzys are best played strategically. they shape the battle (or encounter). sometimes thats a
well placed CC spell. Sometimes it's nuking the enemy casters. (more below). the wizzy has the flexibility
to bring the spells that work the best to each quest.
and no, I'm not trying to pigeon hole, that's just where I see the strength in the two classes. there is nothing
wrong with playing an enchantment sorc as long as you realize that you're going to be hurting in some quests.
just like there is nothing wrong with playing a dps wizzy (except before u9 you'd be drinking pots like a dwarf
does ale).

anyway- with the above thoughts- nuking (to me) is instakill spells. If your polar ray will kill a mob outright, then
I consider it a nuke. Mostly though, I consider nuking to be more along the lines of the pk, fod, wail type spell.
my basis for this opinion is the nuclear weapon: it destroys whatever it hits.

I'm not sure how u9 will change my perception of the classes. gotta wait and see i think.

[Velexia]

Beware of Falling Costs
Spell point costs are being reduced on many nuke spells (see quote below). One of the given reasons: Wizard and Sorcerer are difficult classes for newer players. My concern is that the arcane classes risk becoming brutish ranged DPS, rather than patient, calculating, ranged killers.

The Purpose of Wizards and Sorcerers
Wizards should be hard to play. There, I said it. Flavor-wise, wizards should have devastating arcane power, but limited uses per rest and limited survivability. Kill any monster, but choose wisely, because you can't kill them all. Mind whom you zap and where you stand, because you're not built to survive a counterattack.

Keeping the Game Fun
Even if he is a glass cannon with limited ammo, though, the wizard needs something to do in the small fights, or he'll feel like a piece of luggage. The way the system works now, we do have the oddity of wizards with great axes at low levels. Then they hit level 7, and the new oddity is that they use Wall of Fire for nearly everything. The reductions in spell point costs are meant to treat both oddities, a fact which I applaud.

Nuke Spam!
My concern, and the reason I'm writing, is that the devs might take this too far. Part of the fun of playing a wizard (or sorcerer) is that I can't throw nuke spells constantly. Sure, I can demolish a single fight, but I have to pick and choose where best to apply my arcane powers. This is particularly true at level 6; at this point, I have okay spell points and a decent variety of nukes to choose from, but I don't yet have Wall of Fire to cheese with.

If nukes cost too little, this will go away, especially for sorcerers (with their larger SP pools). Even in a party of six, I'll be able to spam nukes until everything is dead, and never mind whether I'm using spells on a key target. In short, sorcerers may become a sustained DPS class rather than a nuke class. Please, Devs, be careful; don't take these cost reductions too far!


For anyone unfamiliar, here's the snippet that has the devs' reasoning:

Instead of lowering SP costs, I would have increased the base damage output of spells that are meant to be more appealing than Firewall for damage/sp ratio (since that is what it's all about).

Win win (win) situation. We like big numbers, we start using other spells, spell costs stay th same, so no need to change metamagic.

[Gorbadoc]

In my opinion, it depends on what you mean by "nuking".

That's more of an objective fact of language than an opinion; the meaning (and therefore soundness) of an argument necessarily depends on the meanings of its component terms.

But I know what you mean, and you are right; there are multiple plausible interpretations of "nuking". In this context, I would use these definitions:

DPS = Damage per second. It's often shorthand for "Sustained DPS". After all, if a character's stated purpose is "DPS", then presumably that character must be able to sustain that DPS.

Nuke = High-damage attack that consumes meaningfully limited ammo. Even if we call them something other than "nukes", this kind of attack appears in video game after video game; we need some word for referring to it.

It's the sustainability that I would use as a guideline for deciding what is or isn't a nuke (or whatever we call it). SLAs might not be nukes, actually; when a build recovers 2,000 SP per shrine, I hesitate to say the character has a meaningful limit on how many times he can use an ability that costs 6 SP and has a short cooldown. Of course, it might feel like a nuke if the the damage is high enough, but there we run into the nerf problem.

Suppose we get these awesomely powerful attacks and unlimited ammo. Something's gotta give: Either the ammo needs to be cut, the damage needs to be cut, or I need to find a more balanced game. If it's the damage that gets cut, then, yeah, I'll say it's become DPS. If it's the ammo that gets cut, I'll say it's still nukes.

Instead of lowering SP costs, I would have increased the base damage output of spells that are meant to be more appealing than Firewall for damage/sp ratio (since that is what it's all about).

Win win (win) situation. We like big numbers, we start using other spells, spell costs stay th same, so no need to change metamagic.

This makes some sense to me. It would definitely be in keeping with all my talk of how "Wizards should be nukers." I'm not sure how fun or balanced it would be, but anyway I'd be curious to hear why the devs chose not to go this route in rebalancing spells.

[stuff]

anyway- with the above thoughts- nuking (to me) is instakill spells. If your polar ray will kill a mob outright, then
I consider it a nuke. Mostly though, I consider nuking to be more along the lines of the pk, fod, wail type spell.
my basis for this opinion is the nuclear weapon: it destroys whatever it hits.

I'm not sure how u9 will change my perception of the classes. gotta wait and see i think.

Yeah, I agree with both of these paragraphs. Except the part about nuclear weapons, since a real nuclear weapon destroys the neighborhood it hits, and wizards usually (though not always) try for something a bit more precise :-)