a suggestion (in General)

Eorlas September 21 2005 6:36 PM EDT

Most will probably this is a FORS but I wanted to try because maybe it will be concidered. I was thinking of a new type of weapon that aids magic minions. A staff. This would take the place of the melee weapon. It will be used to aid spells but you cannot physically attack. I'll let the community talk about it now.

Stephen Young September 21 2005 6:43 PM EDT

Well, yes: It is a FORS. The reason is that DD spells have been designed to effectively balance against melee damage. If there was anything like what you have mentioned implemented, it would be either over powered, or so weak that the PR gain from upgrading it wouldn't be worth it.

[T]Vestax September 21 2005 6:52 PM EDT

Please refrain from naming posts things like "an idea" or "a suggestion" seeing as they could be about anything. This will help attract people who have a genuine interest in the subject and it will make it easier to distinguish your post from others. It can also add to your perceived intelligence quotient in most cases.

QBRanger September 21 2005 6:55 PM EDT

Directly from the FAQ--FORS---#13:

Q: Mage staffs would be cool to augment magical power!
A: private explained why this is dumb with more patience than I would:

Tanks: Can become more powerful than mages, but cost lots of money to maintain. Mages: Tend to be cheaper than tanks, but also tend to be less powerful (and less able to deal with armor penalties)
I think this provides a nice balance between spending money on your chars and spending exp on them; I see no reason to change it.

RIPsalt3d September 21 2005 7:04 PM EDT

To elaborate on what Vestax said, this is what you were looking at while you typed your 'suggestion':

Please give a descriptive subject. 'I have a question' is a poor subject; so is '... an idea.' 'How does the black market work?' is better, or, 'Idea: increasing Clan interaction.'

So your subject was a very good example of what not to do. Had you chosen something like 'suggestion: mage staff', people could have decided to ignore it, or to warm up their flame throwers. :)

RIPsalt3d September 21 2005 7:05 PM EDT

Except now that I think about it, everyone is being terribly helpful about it. Where's the anger? Sigh...

[T]Vestax September 21 2005 7:06 PM EDT

As to the subject itself. This has been discussed excessively. Yet, hindering talk on any subject would prevent growth of new ideas and so people should learn to indulge you rather then flame you. I tried to find the post that last referred to this subject, yet it seems that post had a unrelated or ambiguous name as well.

These were some of the conclusions that were drawn though.

1) Mages must choose. Mages can only protect themselves from AMF with endurance, which can only be gotten from a ToE. It is essentially the Mages armor. However, ToE can not be used with a CoI, which is the only way to raise spell damage. Allowing a mage to both raise their spell damage (with a staff) and protect themselves from AMF was deemed as having no draw backs and therefore not worth implementing.

2) The weapon allowance. The fact that it is a weapon would make the staff much more of an advantage then the CoI since it would add close to nothing in PR while boosting the DD damage in a linear fashion.

There is much more to the discussion, but that's all that struck me as interesting from the last time we talked about this.

Undertow September 21 2005 7:22 PM EDT


AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] September 22 2005 4:47 AM EDT

As a new player, I doubt Drizzt had seen all the old topics on this, so I'll cut him some slack.

The FORS answer is out of date. There is one and only one reason Mage Staves/Wand/weapons don't exist.

Jon doesn't like them.

This thread is closed to new posts. However, you are welcome to reference it from a new thread; link this with the html <a href="/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=001WmO">a suggestion</a>