Saturday Spell-Storm Bearer

“An invasion of hell?”


“What’s with the staves?”

“You’ll see!”

This spell is related to last week’s spell, Hell Freezes Over, as a possible alternative approach suggested in the comments. We’ll use a character like that of the previous approach, but specialized for encharge spells like this instead of big spells. In this case, his fatigue hardly matters, since he can prepare this spell before hand and the shorter spell reduces the chance of failure, even if he casts it repeatedly for the same amount of time. We’ll leave Will intact, because without it the caster would have a chance of failure with even these spells.

Class: Magic-user; Level: 20; Strength: 6; Constitution 10; Dexterity: 19; Wisdom: 20; Intelligence: 28; Spell Casting: 17; Encharge Mastery: 11; Will: 2; Spell Points: 3040

This means his encharge spell can use 32 DoP, throwing out 17 unwanted DoP at most (though not reducing the cost by this means). He gets 32 bonus DoP, able to double these encharges.

Left Hand:

Neta (Natural Radius): Chaos (Indirect), Wind (Indirect)

Vi (Water Arc): Chaos (Full)

Zo (Negativity Arc): Chaos (Indirect), Wind (Indirect)

Zo (Negativity Arc): Chaos (Full)

Zo (Negativity Arc): Chaos (Indirect) Wind (Indirect)

Zo (Negativity Arc): Chaos (Full)

Zo (Negativity Arc): Chaos (Indirect)

Zo (Negativity Arc):

Zo (Negativity Arc):

Zo (Negativity Arc):

Zo (Negativity Arc):

Zo (Negativity Arc):

Zo (Negativity Arc):

Sar (Evil Radius):

saying “on wa juo ki loa”

The plan behind this spell is to use multiple ice storm spells with overlapping coverage areas to get similar coverage and damage more efficiently. There are a few factors we are trying to use to increase efficiency. First, we aren’t wrestling with the AoE soft cap, where additional AoE points come expensively. Second, we’re using an encharge where damage comes at 1.5 per Spell Point as opposed to 0.875 per spell point for rolled damage. Third, we use a smaller power syllable, On, which has half the power of Mon, but one fourth of the cost, again doubling out efficiency. Fourth, we’re hoping that the duration aspect, which halves the power but has over time effects,  will over all contribute to efficiency. Assuming stationary targets, it deals a total of 225% damage over and above without a duration (3.25x total), but some of this advantage is negated by the cost of duration components, which account for 1/8th of the spell power.

On the negative side, AoE may have a soft cap, but that’s to curb the exponentially increasing effectiveness of AoE, avoiding the soft cap may actually be a negative. We are also using several components with added cost to get the encharge put together. Most importantly, however, Hell Freezes Over used a charge of Greater Casting to get an additional doubling of the power at essentially no extra cost, whereas this spell approach basically disallows Greater Casting and so we will not use it. Also, in order to get the same coverage with smaller patches, we need a range, which eats up nearly a fifth of spell’s power. Let’s look at the numbers.

This spell costs 284 SP. We’ll go in with 4 such staves encharged, for a total of 1136, 11% more than Hell Freezes Over. We’ll want to make that up with more than 11% additional damage. The staves have 4 charges each, so, with a range of 24 feet and 16 total charges, we cast the centers in a radius around our position, which puts them 22.5 degrees apart, or 9.4 feet. That’s some significant overlap, with 16 points of AoE the storms are doing 80% damage at the centers of their adjacent storms, 64% at the next storm. Each storm is doing 55.5% damage at our position, totaling 888% of the damage from a single charge. Damage at the center of a storm on the opposite side of the circle is 30.8%.

These storms have an initial center damage of only 36 each. This gives a damage at our position of 319.7 at the beginning, 1039 over the course of the whole storm duration, this compared to 688-864 for Hell Freezes Over. That’s a good power markup, but our position isn’t really where we want the damage. Actually, this analysis is pretty complicated. I’m going to go ahead and write a script to make plots so you can just see it instead of a block of text, be right back…

I’m back. Things don’t look great. Here’s some plots comparing the two damage outputs:comparecompare2

What’s the upshot of these plots? The staff approach does more or equal damage up to 37 feet from the center, but after that we move into the deep blue region where Hell Freezes Over is doing more than 500 more damage on average. All in all, this approach does some significant damage up close, maybe 15% more, but it doesn’t have the extremely powerful reach, which doesn’t even account for the tactical questions of getting the storms up all at once or in a reasonable way. They take a turn to use and only last 24 turns. Do we bring staff users? Or do we have a casting pattern? Will there even be enemies nearby when we start? Why would they charge in? If we wait until they charge, can we get coverage quickly enough?

What did you think of this craziness? Do you like this approach? How would you address the tactical issues? Any other spell types you’d like to see? Tell us below and we may do it in a coming week.

This entry was posted in Spells and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s