Elementalist rebalancing

[_Ln_]

Recently there were talks about some classes uniqueness and pitfalls/moments of glory for some of them. Particularly I was interested in the discussion about elementalists which currently look like nerfed wizards (base spellbook drop chance?) and limited usability of their innate spell learning.

I took a liberty of creating a spreadsheet and placing spell knowledge progression in current versions of ADOM (1.1.1 since data is from IGB), as well as adding my own suggestions which increase the gains.

I've also added suggestions about Lightning Bolt and Petrification.

Finally, I would like to discuss more possibilities for making elementalists differ more while remaining interesting to play. I've decided on the following points:
1) Give them a penalty to book reading, as otherwise their magic is not particularly different from any other.
2) Give them "elemental bonuses" according to their individual power, like the following: +St/2 damage bonus to fire ball, +St/3 to fire bolt, +St/5 to burning hands; +Dx/3 to lightning ball, +Dx/4 to lightning bolt; +Wi/4 to ice ball, +Wi/4 to frost bolt. Bonuses should be calculated based on active stats, not base.
3) Introduce several reasonable earth-based spells: 1 healing spell/1 regeneration spell (cast once, works for several turns) and 1 shield spell (cast once, get +X PV for several turns) and grant elementalists bonuses to these spells from To score.

I understand that these changes are unlikely to be implemented, because they are rather serious, I suppose. I'd still like to see modified spell knowledge increases to be at least considered, because current gameplay with elementalists suffers in comparison as opposed to other spellcasters.

The spreadsheet is here (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AjvRY6ZsGuTLdHM4YTVVbENYc3UtQXdSSzdTaVNZd 1E#gid=0). You may comment and modify data there (better create more columns I think), but please don't vandalize it without reason.

Any suggestions and opinions are welcome in this thread.

[Silfir]

Add some Lightning Bolt and a little more Lightning Ball and call it a day. Elementalists are fine the way they are.

[Deathwind]

The biggest issue I see are the class powers, I'd like to see things like elemental damage added melee attacks (similar to suffixed weapons) or faster casting to set them apart.

the magic given is very biased towards fire, would swapping fire bolt for lightning bolt be a bad idea?


Elementalists normally don't use written magic but employ powers they harness from within.Why do they start trained in literacy?

I agree with the book learning penalty but there would need to be an increase in castings per level for it to be fair as I've had more than a few elementalists just run out.

[Silfir]

It does say "normally", you know. They're encouraged to derive their power from the elements themselves rather than spellbooks, but they're still trained in reading spellbooks, if not as rigorously, and they will compromise for the sake of saving the world.

Not everything has to be extremes.

[Stingray1]

I agree with Silfir in this regard. Elementalists are fun to play the way they currently are. If you are running out of castings you are playing wrong.

[_Ln_]

I agree with Silfir in this regard. Elementalists are fun to play the way they currently are. If you are running out of castings you are playing wrong.

The problem is that I don't play them, because I've tried and found them very boring. If I want to play a spellcaster, I roll a wizard or a necro. Playing a spellcaster that gets around 400 points in Fire ball and even less in other ball spells is unfulfilling.

[JellySlayer]

If some changes were to be made to this class, my inclination would be to push them more toward the extreme: Greatly reduce their capacity to learn from books, but make up for it with innate abilities.

Here would be a somewhat extreme version:

-Elementalists learn from spellbooks about as well as mindcrafters. Or even make it that they cannot learn any non-elemental spells at all, through any means (including babbling mouth, wonder, etc.)
-Add lightning bolt and petrify to their spell lists (why not?)
-Generally increase the number of castings that they get per spell. Double the current amount would not be outrageous, IMHO.
-For every level of proficiency the elementalist has in one of their elemental spells, the energy cost required to cast it is reduced by 10, to a minimum of 400 energy per casting.

[Stingray1]

If their castings are doubled, I cannot see them ever running out. It is already very hard to run out of casting if you use spells only when necessary and don't kill rats with spells. The point of having a certain number of casting is so that they can run out of castings.

Every class should have some sort of nemesis in the game and Karmic dragon-kin plays a good role here against elementalists. Giving them petrification will take that away.

[Al-Khwarizmi]

Actually I don't see anything wrong with elementalists not running out of castings of elemental spells (or at least of some of them, maybe not the most powerful ones). It would contribute to differentiate the class much more (wizards have to save castings, elementalists don't) and it wouldn't be OP or unbalanced as long as they get very significant penalties to book learning or to casting non-elemental spells. In fact, I'd straight away give them a ∞ symbol for burning hands on the get go, and maybe at level 12 or so, a ∞ symbol for one or two bolt spells. Well, at least assuming that ADOM had unicode support :)

Which would be more powerful: a wizard that runs out of castings of burning hands and fire bolt, or an elementalist that doesn't run out of castings of those, but struggles (say, like a melee class) to learn spells from books?

Most of the most powerful spells in the game (teleport, healing spells, strength of atlas, invisibility) are non-elemental, so I don't have any doubt that the wizard would still be much more powerful. But the elementalist would feel more different and allow from a different playstyle (basically fry everything - although they still need to keep an eye on PP, especially now that HP casting has been nerfed) so there would be more motivation to play with them.

[Singbird]

Lost my response, so my ideas in nutshell.

1. Improved fireball exclusive to elementalists.
2. Elemental storm class power mostly useless. Replace with a sequence of 4-8 bolts in one direction for 400-800 energy cost per bolt or an improved fire-, ice-, or lighting ball with radius 2. Or replace "immune to weather effects" with the former and balance accordingly, and replace elemental storm with the latter. I feel like the original elemental storm was meant to feel like a sort of superpower when it comes to class powers, but the situations in which it can be used never really arise.
3. Make impossible to learn elemental spells from books, so would lock elementalists out of lighting bolt, mystic shovel, petrification and maybe acid bolt and acid ball. Current spell selection is fine to me.
4. Have higher power point (2-3 times) and/or energy point (1500-3000) cost for other spells.
5. More castings or 1d[character level] chance to get +1 power on each naturally learnt spell on level up or something.

[Silfir]

I still don't understand why we need to touch their book learning at all. Right now elementalists aren't played mainly because wizards are so good. The solution there isn't to make elementalists worse.

Right now, there is a case to be made for playing elementalists over wizards: They have better access to spells in the early game, before the books you want or need are abundant, and so have a more consistent and overall easier early game. While they taper off mid- to late game compared to wizards, they're still extremely powerful by virtue of being spellcasters - more powerful than most other classes in the game. Combine the easier early game and the still amazing mid- to late game, and there is plenty of reason to play an elementalist over a wizard.

The more I read these debates, the more I get the sense that comparing everything under the sun to wizards is where the problems begin. It's not really the fault of elementalists or druids for that matter that, when evaluating a class, our mouths start to water as we imagine ourselves standing in the midst of hordes of foes acid balling them until our fingertips dissolve. Wizards are just about the only spellcasting class that can flaunt their overabundant magic power in this manner, it's true. (At least, with that amount of ease. Other classes can find ball spellbooks and get decent amounts of castings. 400 Fireball, incidentally, is more than decent.) But that doesn't make either elementalists, necromancers, priests or even druids obsolete. They can still read. They still learn spells. They will still have great repertoires come late game. It doesn't distinguish them from other spellcasting classes or from wizards - but it's no less an essential part of what makes them fun or worthwhile to play. Take spellbooks away from them and you have to absolutely bend over backwards developing alternate features and super special awesome class powers to have a hope of preventing them from booking their ticket to obsolescence, something Thomas can't really afford to do this late in development. Mindcrafters are not very widely used and also arguably inferior to proper spellcasters (including druids), but they still have some appeal because some mindcraft does things spells cannot.

[_Ln_]

I advise those who say that the amount of castings is enough to look up the spreadsheet. I actually increased the overall number (cumulative from lvl 1 to lvl 50) of castings for ball spells 10 times in my suggestions to make it any reasonable. Frankly, I don't think you know what you are talking about. You don't run out of Burning Hands, Fire Bolt and Frost Bolt, that's true - because you get 6000+ castings cumulatively in each of these spells. If you find it fun to play the game with just 3 spells as a so-called master of the elements, that's just great. And the only lightning-based spell you get at lvl20 and increase it by 5 points per level. Are you even serious about it being as it should be?

I've pondered Mystic Shovel, but it kinda undermines the whole negligible point of lvl50 class power.

[Singbird]

The more I read these debates, the more I get the sense that comparing everything under the sun to wizards is where the problems begin.

Not really. I'd be happy if elementalists would be distinguished by *something*, anything at all as the masters of elemental magic they're supposed to be. It could be that their level 12 class power gives a chance to protect their equipment from shock destruction. It could be that their earthquake is so awesome that they can bring down walls in places you normally cannot with earthquake. It could be that they are the only ones with improved fireball. But right now they have nothing, nothing at all. Well they do have elemental storm and summon elemental, but the former is useless and the latter can be done by anyone, even if not in a guaranteed manner.



something Thomas can't really afford to do this late in development. Mindcrafters are not very widely used and also arguably inferior to proper spellcasters (including druids), but they still have some appeal because some mindcraft does things spells cannot.
... So what do elementalists do that spells cannot? Mindcrafters are great exactly because they do stuff spells cannot. Elementalists are not great because they do nothing better than a wizard. They are good for some combinations like maybe drakeling/orc and for trolls for some emergency spells. But if we're talking proper spellcasting races, my elementalists have never really been ahead in spells at any point in the game.

Personally I'm not expecting any of this ever to be implemented. Otherwise I would start with my ideas for fighters and melee combat penalties for spellcasters. It's just brainstorming.

[GordonOverkill]

Elementalists are not great because they do nothing better than a wizard.

Great access to offensive spells in the early game. With wizards it happened to me quite some times that I ran out of offensive spells early on. With Elementalists that happened to me not once.

[gut]

I will agree that we have too many nerfed wizards. I'm not even against nerfed wizards, but we just have too many.

[Carter]

I will agree that we have too many nerfed wizards. I'm not even against nerfed wizards, but we just have too many.

You could probably lose the druid class all together tbh, replace it with something decent.

If you look at the hall of fame etc, druids are the least represented class because their class powers suck.

[magpie]

You know, I don't recall Thomas ever saying that ADOM classes should be 'balanced' and 'equally viable'. This isn't World of Warcraft ... or <shudder> that trainwreck that is Dungeon Crawl Stone Soup.

[Stingray1]

All the classes are unique. Each one has their own little special thing about them. I like it like that. I have and would never consider other spellcasters nerfed wizards, because that is not what they are. Wizards are boring to play.

I somewhat agree that Elementalists should have little more trouble reading spellbooks, but not much. They get their spell knowledge from within, not from a stupid book. Giving them infinite knowledge in their spells doesn't make sense, they still have to meditate a bit on getting that spell knowledge.

A druids class powers is within what one would expect from a druid's class powers. I and I'm sure others do play them. I play all classes and races as determined by fate.

[GordonOverkill]

I agree with Stingray. Just a while ago I played a complete run with an Elementalist that I really enjoyed. Maybe they are weaker than wizards, but honestly: how cares? They are still easily strong enough to allow a successful game. If you rather want the toughest professions, well, then play a wizard.
To me it's great to have some more variety among casters (and I don't care too much if their class-powers are actually usefull or not... it still adds alot to the feeling to know that they have got these powers).
Especially for fate-runs it's great to have a little more of a random challange factor. You roll a druid and say "Okay, at least a caster... and I don't have to care about cats." and another day you roll a wizard and say "Great, fate smiles upon me! Now let's hope not to mess it up!"

[Al-Khwarizmi]

But most of the changes proposed are precisely to give more variety, not to make elementalists more similar to wizards in any way.

[GordonOverkill]

From my perspective most suggestions are about buffing their elemental powers and therefore reducing the rest of their spellpowers. The problem I see is that their elemental powers are already extremely powerfull the way they are right now. If you buff them further, they will become absolute beasts of elemental mass destruction.
I think it's just like Silfir said: The actual problem is the fact that wizards can become masters of the elements, too, and have even got some further advantages.

[Stingray1]

Some of the changes would make them stronger though and I don't believe they need to be made stronger, the opposite maybe yes, but not definately. They are already very different from other casters in that they don't receive extra book drops and really feel like an elementalist with their class powers and innate spell knowledge.

Some of the proposals will make them maybe feel more elementally, but too much so. They are meant to be limited according to TB. As I said, I feel they are almost like they should be. Maybe reducing their book learning capability a little is an option to make them differ even more from other spellcasters and make them even more limited. So, I agree with that.

[littlebrather]

The difference between Elementalist and Wizzy is the spell cost reduction. Sure, More Lightning Ball casting? For what? Another 'hit and run' for PP recover? Why not to play Bard? Even Priests are better in casting near all of the Elementalist's spells with lower PP cost. That is ridiculous. Priests have at least abilities to fight with their weapon as is, not to spend hours of Spider factoring.
My suggestion is to exclude all the 'elemental' spells (sadly they are obtainable both for Priests and Wizards) in new spellschool, and give them to elementalists with lower PP cost.
Surely, if Wizards and Necromancers like to be named as 'Arcana' men, I don't mind, but unique relationships between Elementalists and Ancient Powers of Ancardia should be more complex and secret. Some power couldn't be obtained by reading books in high tower or praying a lot.

[GordonOverkill]

Do you really think that elementalists are too weak? Honestly, I got a different opinion.

[Blasphemous]

Just replace elemental bolt class power with a Magic Ball. Works like all ball spells but uses the magic damage that cannot be resisted. Sure it will deal the least damage of all ball spells but it will make elementalists unique and give them the edge they need.
I see people pointing out easier early game with elementalists, but early game doesn't last forever. It is mid and late game that we should focus on, that's where the most fun is, where most class powers are used and what not.
I'd see it this way: Increase castings for elementalists, reduce costs a little, make reading books more difficult, unless related to elemental spells and give them Magic Ball instead of the useless bolt. Voila.
I also think they should get more earth spells but it's tough to decide which ones.

A caster should rely mostly on spells and very occasionally on melee, that's why I expect to be able to kill every rat with magic and only from time to time play around with eternium stuff in my hand.
I want a specialized caster and I can get all the melee penalties in the world, as long as it is an actual caster, not some half-mage that runs out of castings.
That's what elementalist is at the moment and you won't convince me it's anything else. They aren't weak, just not different enough from wizards.

[_Ln_]

Do you really think that elementalists are too weak? Honestly, I got a different opinion.

This is by no means an adequate criterion, but the timing is almost too good for this discussion - http://www.adom.de/forums/showthread.php/12851-Some-questions-(spoilers-warnings)?p=84072#post84072

However, as I think, this is a good showcase of a player choosing a supposedly powerful offensive magic user and learning that things are not that good. Even introducing a great fix for xp curve won't fix this much.

[Singbird]

Do you really think that elementalists are too weak? Honestly, I got a different opinion.

That's more a strawman really. I don't think anyone said they're too weak. If they were, then almost all the non-caster classes would be too weak as well, since elementalists really are "just as good" at melee as everyone else is.

Elemental combat magic power is definitely the focus of the discussion, or so it seems, but it doesn't need be so. Like I said, I'd be fine with making elementalists more elemental by ways that would not drastically increase their power to destroy enemies.

Removing some spells from other casters and making them exclusive to elementalists would not increase their power. It would only decrease the power of others.
Making their class powers grant an inborn ring of ice / ring of fire / lighting equivalent would only be a great distinctive utility, not really increasing their power THAT much, as rings of ice are fairly common, rings of fire you "never" need anyway and lighting destruction is quite rare. But at least you COULD then use your elemental storm, your class power, without destroying everything you own. You could go into the air temple and the tower and not worry about a thing. That would sound quite elementally already.

Some people are fine with things as they are, with races and classes that don't really differ that much from each other. Some people would like that class differences were more pronounced. That's what it's about, I think. Elementalists don't differ enough in their favor in my opinion. And while you can concentrate on the power side only, it would be nice if other ideas could be thought of.

[Moeba]

If the elementalist is to be changed, I'd prefer simple but essential changes. For instance:
- Return the cost of HP-casting only for elementalists to the way it was before the changes
- Reduce ability to read books

I don't think much more would be necessary to make them differ a lot from the other spellcasters: the HP casting difference would be really big with the way HP casting currently works. Of which I do approve in general, but maybe it would be nice to have one class which CAN easily HP-cast. Elementalists would be the most logical choice, I think, it kinda fits their description of drawing from 'innate powers'.
Of course this would make tough races better for elementalists, instead of elves etc. but I don't think that would be such a big problem. Also before the changes, it wasn't a good idea to make HP casting a habit.

Druids are a completely unique class already IMHO, with all animals not getting hostile and their unique skillset (gardening, herbalism, survival, woodcraft?? it's the only spellcaster with such skills, seriously!)

[Stingray1]

Elementalists are way different than other classes, they are spellcasters that don't find books, they get elemental spells and resistances and summons that are elemental in nature. They train weapon skills just as slow as wizards, so I don't know why you say they are like other non-spellcasters when it comes to melee.

[GordonOverkill]

By the way, a small but nice benefit of the class that hasn't been mentioned yet is the guaranteed access to frost bolt. Very nice for the Tomb of the High Kings.

[_Ln_]

Elementalists are way different than other classes, they are spellcasters that don't find books, they get elemental spells and resistances and summons that are elemental in nature. They train weapon skills just as slow as wizards, so I don't know why you say they are like other non-spellcasters when it comes to melee.

The problem is by level, say, 10, wizards/necromancers/druids are very likely to have enough spellbooks to match elementalists in offensive department and surpass them in every other magic school. The only elemental spells elementalists gain are Burning Hands, Fire Bolt and Frost Bolt, everything else is a sparse resource which cannot be used consistently. On the other hand, pretty much any pure spellcaster end-game consists of balling everything if their path.

Elemental summons would be nice if you were at least able to choose which one to summon (earth elemental that is).

[GordonOverkill]

And barbarians are a whole lot stronger than farmers... so what?

e: rather take archers instead of barbarians... fits better, I guess ;-)

[Singbird]

They train weapon skills just as slow as wizards, so I don't know why you say they are like other non-spellcasters when it comes to melee.

The gains from weapon skills are largely linear, but the gains in required weapon marks are far from linear. So where a serious fighter, the master of melee, who uses swords the entire game, might finish with swords at level 14 and get +16 to-hit and +11 damage bonus, a wizard, who occasionally holds a sword in hand just because he can, will end the game with swords level 10-12 and gain +9-12 to-hit and +6-8 damage. The double weapon marks is just a meaningless gimmick to me. This is further marginalized for example by the presence of the tactics skill, which everyone can get. Hopefully there are some hidden penalties I'm not aware of.

But you are a man of minor differences while I'm not so maybe you don't see it the same way. : )

[_Ln_]

And barbarians are a whole lot stronger than farmers... so what?

e: rather take archers instead of barbarians... fits better, I guess ;-)

Barbarians are stronger than farmers because they are supposed to be. Archers are better than farmers because they are supposed to be.

However, elementalists are supposed to be the masters of elemental powers. In reality wizards (masters of the arcane arts who have general benefits for all spells) are better than elementalists right in their field. Necromancers (masters of necromancy) are not worse in this field. Priests (masters of the divine and arts and supposedly defensive/restoration magic) are suddenly better than elementalists right in their field. Druids are not worse in this field.

Do you think this is a great design for a class?

[JellySlayer]

I'm not sure about priests and druids. Elementalists get a few hundred castings of fireball, iceball and lightning ball. I don't think I've ever got more than one ball spell on a priest or druid--including the library--without using wishes. Ball spells are very, very rare for divine casters. Bolt spells aren't all that common for them either. They also get far fewer castings.

[Al-Khwarizmi]

Maybe not for priests, but _Ln_'s algorithm definitely holds for wizards and necromancers, and that alone is enough to say that elementalists need changes IMO.

[GordonOverkill]

Do we at least all concure that their general power is absolutely okay and that the whole discussion is not about buffing them to wizard-level?

[Al-Khwarizmi]

Yes, I've personally never denied that. I don't need any class buffed to wizard levels, if I want an easy win, I can already play a wizard.

I just think they should be better than wizards at something (namely, of course, at elemental magic) even if they are worse at other, probably more important things. Right now, for most purposes they are nerfed wizards, at least from level 10 or so (i.e. for the vast majority of the game)

[GordonOverkill]

I feel a strong urge to start a game with a wizard right now to find out if they are really that strong x-)

[_Ln_]

Priests get 50% spell cost reduction. Then again, I suppose you can train Frost/Fire Bolt with elementalists to +60 and get the same.

As I see it, priests will generally catch up with elementalists by the endgame, where elementalists' magic sucks a bit.

Derived from bad source:

Bolt spells (except MM) are almost equally possible for divine casters. Ball spells are 10x rarer, true. But you get 10x more books, eh?

[Stingray1]

Priests get 50% spell cost reduction. Then again, I suppose you can train Frost/Fire Bolt with elementalists to +60 and get the same.

As I see it, priests will generally catch up with elementalists by the endgame, where elementalists' magic sucks a bit.

Devised from bad source:

Bolt spells (except MM) are almost equally possible for divine casters. Ball spells are 10x rarer, true. But you get 10x more books, eh?


So this is about making elementalists stronger and more like other spellcasters. That doesn't sound like making them differ more _Ln_?

[_Ln_]

So this is about making elementalists stronger and more like other spellcasters. That doesn't sound like making them differ more _Ln_?

Where in that post do I suggest giving elementalists spell cost reduction?

Changes proposed by me in the first post give elementalists a unique flavor by boosting their elemental magic while stripping them from spellbook learning completely. This is balanced in my eyes and serve to differ them from other spellcasters.

[Stingray1]

Nowhere, but you are saying that you want their elemental magic boosted so that their bolt spells will be as effective, if not more, in the end as other spellcasters'.
That sounds like making them stronger in their bolt spells so they can be on par with other spellcasters in those spells.

So, is this about making elementalists stronger and different or just stronger, because they are already different and limited as intended?

[JellySlayer]

I think the power is that you can increase their power in one area, but then make them weaker in another area. So the overall difficulty is the same. A powerful advantage combined with a crippling disadvantage does mean that they are stronger than characters with neither.

[Stingray1]

Sorry, Jellyslayer. I have no idea what you are trying to say. My English is not that good.

Edit - Oh, I get it now. You are saying that if their spells become more powerful and plentiful and they are crippled(?) by not being able to read spellbooks, they would be at the same difficulty level. I think. So, this will make them stronger. I see. A bit contradictory. Same difficulty and stronger. Pardon, I'm feeling confused.

[Silfir]

I'll just go ahead and say that I will never, ever play an elementalist in my life if they stop being able to read books.

There's throwing out the baby with the bathwater, and there's encasing the baby in frozen bathwater and tossing both off a cliff.

[Stingray1]

I feel a strong urge to start a game with a wizard right now to find out if they are really that strong x-)

Well, I've taken a human wizzard to the casino without casting one spell. So, yes they are pretty strong. :D

[Moeba]

I'll just go ahead and say that I will never, ever play an elementalist in my life if they stop being able to read books.

There's throwing out the baby with the bathwater, and there's encasing the baby in frozen bathwater and tossing both off a cliff.

I can't stop myself from pointing out that the ice would make a great protective casing ;)
Actually I completely agree with your earlier post that the problem is more that wizards are so strong. Still it's interesting to see if any good ideas appear for changing the elementalist. I'd kinda like easier HP casting, to make up for the higher PP cost - but I've gotten no support yet, so that's probably not gonna happen.

[GordonOverkill]

*deletedeletedeleted

[GordonOverkill]

Well, I've taken a human wizzard to the casino without casting one spell. So, yes they are pretty strong. :D

That was that discworld challange, right? However, I doubt that "Is able to reach the casino without casting" should be called a specific strength of wizards ;-)


I'd kinda like easier HP casting, to make up for the higher PP cost - but I've gotten no support yet, so that's probably not gonna happen.

I like the idea. In my eyes an elementalist is more of a "physical" caster, so it would fit!

[_Ln_]

My bad, didn't mean completely of course. Make them read books on par with, say, farmer - you'll be able to do it successfully with enough Learning and Literacy and Concentration and levels.

Let's make things clear.
My main concern is the following:
Why do players play spellcasters? Because they want to access magic. There's so much magic in ADOM, offensive magic, healing magic, buffing magic, utility magic etc. And players want to use it all. Now, our spellcasters have increase spellbook rate just to satisfy the player's demand to use it all. By level 15 spellcasters already have the majority of the spells. And players rejoice and use magic which will bring their foes much quicker.

Let's have a look at elementalists then. All they have is Burning Hands, Frost Bolt and Fire Bolt. Their base spellbook rate will mean next to zero spellbooks till they get to casino or even library. But the problem is that they case Burning Hands, Frost Bolt and Fire Bolt with exactly the same efficiency as all other spellcasters. Why play elementalists at all when any other spellcaster will be exactly the same given they survive early game?

Why give them more castings? Because they need more variety than Frost Bolt and Fire Bolt.

Why give them unique bonuses to elemental spells (the only that they have)? Precisely because these spells are the only that they have. There is no reason, no reward to play elementalist because all other spellcasters offer more. If they are masters of the elements, let them be better than others at this. This is what profession/class/specialization is about - you do better in your chosen field of study.

Why penalize their book-reading then? Elementalists don't find spellbooks as others, but if they wish for spellbooks of Acid Ball, they are going to disregard all their elemental spells in favor of one that is more powerful. This makes zero sense, when a guy trains all his youth to build a powerful synergy with the power of raw elements, then find a bunch of spellbooks and promptly forgets all his previous training. So your unique training gives you the power to cast Fireball 200 times by the time you achieve the levels of experience and power normal people expect from gods? But you can learn more than that from a spellbook you've chanced to find at the start of your quest (level 1) because your learning is 25? What kind of specialization is elementalist then? Intrinsically inferior to all other spellcasting disciplines?

Yes, having the ability to spam ball spells in the endgame will make them less different than other spellcasters. But this is what you play spellcasters for, there is no way for them to remain attractive in the endgame unless they demolish hordes of opponents with one spell. Currently elementalists in the endgame are mediocre fighters who can zap fire and ice rays at monsters. So interesting to play I almost pee myself in anticipation when RNG rolls me an elementalist.

[Silfir]

Elementalists in the end game are perfectly capable spellcasters who cast anything they've happened to find if there's a pressing need to, of course preferring to use those spells they possess in abundance. (Didn't you say you didn't play elementalists?)

The worst thing you can do to them is turn into not perfectly capable spell casters. I'm not even opposed to expanding their elemental spellcasting prowess - spell cost reductions, access to Lightning Bolt, more castings of the more powerful spells, that all sounds swell enough. I'm just mystified why you insist on changing anything about their book-reading skills. Your reasoning makes no sense at all - you're essentially demanding that elementalists should be dumber because they're not wizards. They're trained in literacy, they start with robes and quarterstaves and wands and scrolls and potions and magical rings - by all appearances they're scholars, too. They're not forgetting or disregarding their class training if they learn Acid Ball from a spellbook - they're just adapting to the requirements of their quest to save the goddamned world. Go up to a level 35 elementalist who just slogged through that spellbook of Acid Ball and ask them how they feel about renouncing their elementalist traditions - they'd look at you with the kind of pity they'd usually reserve for Yggaz, the fool. Yeah, generally they use a "less scientific approach" than wizards do, but that doesn't translate into disregarding that scientific approach in all cases. They're elementalists, not (ele-)mental. They don't need to have as easy a time of it as wizards, but that's already a case. They're still going to be a mile better at the scientific approach than a farmer, a fighter, an archer, or other non-casting classes. All that's required to keep them distinct from wizards in this regard is that they're a little worse at it, and that's what we've already got. (Book drop rates do the rest. To be honest, I feel like book drop rates are in far greater need of readjustment than elementalists.)

One might argue that if their casting repertoire is amended, they'd receive a straight-up power boost, which would have to be countered by a nerf in another area - but that argument follows from a severe misunderstanding about the goal of ADOM class balance. The goal isn't to balance classes around a certain power level. If it were, we'd be thirty pages into researching ways to get wizards even remotely in line with the rest. (They would all suck. Some classes are meant to be more of a challenge and some aren't. ADOM is a single player game and therefore allowed that luxury.) It's about keeping the individual classes interesting and fun to play. Spellcasters are interesting to play because of spells. If you take away the access to utility spells that elementalists currently do have, you're actually making them less enticing to play, which is the opposite of your stated goal. Which makes it all the more mystifying to me that you insist on it.



I mean, the case for playing elementalists right now has already been made, and it's pretty clear: You get the general goodies of being a decent spellcaster and book learner, and you get a bit of a leg up in the early game due to readily available combat magic. You're getting outshone by wizards later in the game, but wizards outshine everyone anyway. You're not, on the other hand, getting outshone by the other spellcasters. Priests don't start with combat magic. Druids have less raw combat strength and are currently kind of shafted as far as class powers go. Both are clerical casters, which puts them on the back foot with a number of spells, including the overkilltastic ball spells. Necromancers don't start with Healing and are major candidates for an early death.





Here's a visualization of the current state of balance:



Necromancer, Druid, WIZARD, Elementalist, Priest



As I've said, it doesn't bug me much that it's like this. But if it does bug you, I don't think elementalists are the right place to look for the solution. Any change with a goal of making elementalists more fun to play (a worthwhile goal!) by expanding on their elementalist abilities, I don't really have a major issue with. I would love them to get Lightning Bolt. (It would already enable them to fight all but a few foes in the game handily without finding a single spellbook. That is pretty cool.)

A "distinct" feel is not in itself something laudable. You can distinguish yourself through excellence as much as through the lack of it.

[gut]

I knew someone would bring up scumming eventually! And that, of course, brings up me.

> In reality wizards (masters of the arcane arts who have general benefits for all spells) are better than elementalists right in their field

I'd be happy to just give them acid bolt

[Stingray1]

At least you don't have to roll-scum elementalists. Well, you don't have to roll-scum anything. But I can understand that if you do roll-scum wizards then elementalists might feel a bit silly to play or any class probably.

Maybe elementalists are in the game as they are for people that like to play adom as it is meant to be played. Imagine role-players sitting around the table re-rolling dozens of times and then go to a dungeon and walk up and down the same stairs, the dungeon master will walk out of the room and never speak to those idiots again. I think ADOM should do the same. ;)

If you like to play your scummed wizards you are welcome to, but don't come and make elementalist to fit your wishes of having an overpowered character on every game.

I am a little more excited when the RNG gives me an elementalist than I am when it gives me a wizard. I guess that is because I don't scum, never intend to either. Quite frankly if you never scum, wizards aren't even that overpowered in my book. To this day I haven't gotten very far into the game with them. One has to cast quite sparingly, not so with elementalists. I often wonder why people think them overpowered, I think I know now.

[Al-Khwarizmi]

I don't scum and I still find them OP (and my first win was with a wizard). Typically you don't run out of castings of offensive spells, in the early game you can get hundreds of castings from your starting books. And then, you find loads of books (well, I use TH, that probably has an influence) that give you more castings of stuff than an elementalist can even dream. By the midgame you'll have a library of utility spells that make you basically invincible. Almost nothing can stop a wizard with farsight and long-range bolts, let alone if you put teleport on top of that.

[Blasphemous]

I agree with _Ln_.
It's not about buffing or nerfing, it's about distinguishing and making unique. As it is, I treat elementalists as less potent wizards and this is exactly what they are.
If there were some features that made them unique, granted them bonuses otherwise unavailable to other classes (elemental magic bonuses), they would be much more interesting.
As it is, what they get via class powers is either obtainable by other means if you play a different caster class or simply obsolete by the time you get it, like their lvl 50 class power.
If I play a caster class again, which will most likely happen soon, elementalists will be the last on my list, since they offer nothing unique and are simply unattractive to play vs wizards.
Having early combat spells is just not enough, especially when other caster classes almost always start with one too.

[Stingray1]

Well, I must be stupid then, because I can win the game with 1 in 3 non-casters I roll. I've even had 3 back-to-backs, but struggle with casters. Although I could get an elementalist to the SIL. Changing the proposed things about them is making them even stronger. Anyway, I'm tired of repeating myself.

[GordonOverkill]

As it is, I treat elementalists as less potent wizards and this is exactly what they are.

Even if it was like this, I'd maybe still chose the elementalist... weaker character = more honor and glory if you win ;-)
By the way, your comment on my DAR thread made me wonder one thing. If you talk about those mighty wizards, do you automatically think of gnomish, high elven or grey elven wizards with learning > 20? Because - like I said in that thread - my dark elven wizard apears to have a very clear early-game-disadvantage in comparison to... say... a dark elven elementalist.

[_Ln_]

I feel like there's not enough people here to discuss and we simply have a clash of opinions between two groups. Still, everyone here has a point and I value the time you guys took to express it. Time to go to bug tracker and possibly appeal to a larger audience and to TB. I will create a bunch of RFEs which can be voted on separately and I'll try to make them in such a way that each RFE will break the game minimally.

[grobblewobble]

I just don't play enough casters to know what to say.. I'll continue to eat my popcorn while you guys fight it out. :cool:

[JellySlayer]

Even if it was like this, I'd maybe still chose the elementalist... weaker character = more honor and glory if you win ;-)
By the way, your comment on my DAR thread made me wonder one thing. If you talk about those mighty wizards, do you automatically think of gnomish, high elven or grey elven wizards with learning > 20? Because - like I said in that thread - my dark elven wizard apears to have a very clear early-game-disadvantage in comparison to... say... a dark elven elementalist.

Well, that's because dark elves suck--they're probably the third worst race overall, and don't make particularly good wizards unless you get a rather fortuitous roll. You'd have problems playing an orc or troll wizard too--though at least in those cases, you'd have decent toughness. Even a human wizard is going to be better than a dark elf, on average. Though to be fair, you managed to make it to Dwarftown on a Lithium start. That still probably puts your character in the top third of successful PCs.

Just for some context here, awhile ago I ran some figures on the race/classes of winners posted here in the forums and in the hall of fame. If memory serves, somewhere between a third and half of all winners were grey elf wizards.

[Stingray1]

Did the study include how many of each R/C was played, quitters included. Percentages in such a study would actually mean something. If I only play gray elven wizards, 100% of my wins will be gray elven wizards.

[JellySlayer]

No, it was a study of characters who won, and what R/C they played. If you pick an ADOM player completely at random, if they've won the game, odds are the winner was a grey elf wizard.

There may be people who play 100 percent of their characters as GEWs, that's true, but that will presumably be balanced out by the fact that there will be other people who will play nothing but troll mindcrafters (I do know of at least one player with something in the order of 50 mindcrafter wins, as it happens).

[_Ln_]

Well, that's because dark elves suck--they're probably the third worst race overall

"Stranger, Lol'th demands yer soul."

[JellySlayer]

"Stranger, Lol'th demands yer soul."

Second worst? [edit]No, sticking with third worst if ratlings are included.

[Stingray1]

No, it was a study of characters who won, and what R/C they played. If you pick an ADOM player completely at random, if they've won the game, odds are the winner was a grey elf wizard.

So, if all of us participating in this discussion plays one and only one of each R/C, without starsign cheating, savescumming, re-rolling or any other form of cheating then tally the wins afterwards then at least half should be GEWs, right? Will take some time.

[JellySlayer]

I'm not sure why you think that people who have won the game don't reroll their characters.

[Silfir]

Well, that's because dark elves suck--they're probably the third worst race overall, and don't make particularly good wizards unless you get a rather fortuitous roll. You'd have problems playing an orc or troll wizard too--though at least in those cases, you'd have decent toughness. Even a human wizard is going to be better than a dark elf, on average. Though to be fair, you managed to make it to Dwarftown on a Lithium start. That still probably puts your character in the top third of successful PCs.

Just for some context here, awhile ago I ran some figures on the race/classes of winners posted here in the forums and in the hall of fame. If memory serves, somewhere between a third and half of all winners were grey elf wizards.

That was kind of GordonOverkill's point, though - elementalists have strengths in the early game that put them above wizards, for a time, unless you're playing a race especially suited to wizardry. Elementalists don't rely on Learning to function the way wizards do. (Hence the line in the description about a less scientific approach.)

[_Ln_]

Second worst? [edit]No, sticking with third worst if ratlings are included.

Haha, nice try.
Alertness and Find Weakness beat starting equipment and stat disadvantage of dark elves and make them better than most IMHO.
While drakelings are objectively better than dark elves, the latter are my 1st pick any time.

[Silfir]

Dark elves don't just come with horrible toughness; they get crap for prices with Waldenbrook's, which doesn't sound like much but makes more of a hassle of the midgame at times than people give it credit for. It's a testament to how good Alertness and Find Weakness are that they're not completely terrible.

[Stingray1]

I'm not sure why you think that people who have won the game don't reroll their characters.

I'm sure many do quit and roll again, but each roll counts as a loss. You can do the study with re-rolls allowed too and I can assure you that if everyone plays each character to his best abilities, at least half of the winners won't be GEWs.

Listen, my point is that counting the wins of each R/C in the appropriate forums, hall of fame, whatever means absolutely nothing. Because those people who posted the wins did not play each and every R/C more or less the same amount of times. One can not gauge which is the strongest R/C by it, especially when people are rerolling on top of that.

P.S. One thing, I think, you can say is that a lot of people play GEWs a lot.

[JellySlayer]

Yes, people play the easy classes more than they play the hard classes. That's kind of the point. GEWs get played a lot because they're easy and, as a result, they produce a lot of winners. On a percentage basis, yes, it's entirely possible that Troll Mindcrafters have a higher win rate than GEWs. That's not because TMs are easier than GEWs. It's because the only people who are stupid enough to play Troll Mindcrafters are people who are really good at the game, and can win with any character.

[_Ln_]

Dark elves don't just come with horrible toughness; they get crap for prices with Waldenbrook's, which doesn't sound like much but makes more of a hassle of the midgame at times than people give it credit for. It's a testament to how good Alertness and Find Weakness are that they're not completely terrible.

We should probably make another thread for that in case someone new joins the elementalists' discussion. Or revive one of the latest on this topic.

I'm still going to break my own suggestion and state that you can't judge races without taking into account class combos. The only exception are drakes and ratlings.
Finally, this is also a matter of playstyle. As I typically play elves, and dark elves among them about 80%, I've stopped caring about Waldenbrook ages ago. DElven toughness is also the highest among elves.

I also enjoy playing humans while everyone else considers them a piece of crap.
Having been aged to death several times in the endgame, I almost never play orcs and trolls.

[LFk]

I actually would really enjoy to see an elementalist that is far more skewed toward his unique trait (much like a mindcrafter). I think the thematic nature of the changes would give the class a more unique feel. I understand that there's a good amount of work to be done, though, and this isn't high priority. Still, the forums are for discussion, and this is definitely a fine idea to spice up a class that always played like a slightly less wizard-y wizard.

An additional offensive class power, like their level 32 class power, "Level 32: Can invoke a special 'elemental storm' attack -- fires a random elemental bolt (fire, lightning or frost) into each of the eight directions -- at the cost of 120 PP.", being available at level 6, 12 etc. instead of the resistances would be an excellent way to give them offensive options in exchange for removing or severely handicapping their ability to read spellbooks.



I'm still going to break my own suggestion and state that you can't judge races without taking into account class combos. The only exception are drakes and ratlings.


About the little side-discussion in this thread, this is a fair statement. The Race can't be considered without the Class. Labeling Dark Elves as "third worst" or "worst" or "second best" seems arbitrary when not considering the class. As far as Wizards and other caster-heavy classes go, i'd agree they are generally less capable than their elven brethren due to somewhat lower learning. The great Find Weakness skill is also wasted on casters. The excellent skill-set, however, makes them extremely capable as an elven fighting class. Dark Elven Paladins are in fact one of my favorite classes and one I regard as very, very easy due to excellent starting equipment, particularly the 10s Elven Chain Mail that makes the early game much less threatening. The high Ma and Dx potential gives them an easier transition from melee combat to ranged/casting relative to other races, and Find Weakness really helps in all facets of physical combat.

Of course this may be attributed to the strength of the class itself, as Drake and Dwarven Paladins are also regarded as powerful and easy. I note the latter is the default suggestion for beginner "melee" players (this is new right? I've never noticed this before.). Still, I'd defend that there are clear advantages that DEs afford for versatile fighting classes (those that want to utilize casting or ranged), over other races . Find Weakness should make them at least above average for Archer or ranged-focused classes, and I'd say they are universally weaker than other races for pure-melee. Their stats, as all low-Str/To races do, make them very difficult for PCs that start with low PV and still rely to some extent on melee combat. They also do headline what i'd regard to be the weakest PC in the game, the Dark Elven Merchant :)

My preferences for racial 'power' tends to focus on their skillset, of which elves have great ones in general, and the lack of vulnerability to one-hit age death, aka the most frustrating (careless) death i've ever had :( (screw orcs).

By the way, this is the first i've come back to ADOM forums after submitting my boss-monster. It looks like there have been a lot of excellent changes, and I look forward to playing a game or two! I did make a PC, but am debating playing it through, as I don't want to spoil the game too much, and I'd love to play the final product all at once...

[Deathwind]

The elemental storm is one of the worst powers in the game. It costs a lot of pp, has a good chance of hurting/killing you, and monsters will still shrug the bolts. I think the idea of giving them a ring of fire/ice power in it's place would do a lot to help them stand out as elemental masters without breaking them.

[JellySlayer]

My preferences for racial 'power' tends to focus on their skillset, of which elves have great ones in general, and the lack of vulnerability to one-hit age death, aka the most frustrating (careless) death i've ever had :( (screw orcs).

I think this is one area where I differ from a lot of people. I consider skills to be basically the least important consideration as far as race is concerned. Starting stats/equipment (and now, potentials) are much more important, IMHO. I'd happily take an extra 5 points of starting PV over Alertness.

[gut]

hmm, I might agree about the +5 PV

also, if you aren't scumming, you aren't playing adom

also, I still just say give them acid bolt at, say, xl 12 and be done with it

[Stingray1]

also, if you aren't scumming, you aren't playing adom

That is a fitting signature. ADoM is a role-playing game.

Maybe, there can be just a question system at character creation: "Are you a scummer [Y/n]?" Answering yes just gives you unlimited castings of everything and high stats. Would save a lot of trouble and time wasting.

[Moeba]

I'm quitting this thread, both parties have already said what they had to say.

I think the elementalist is a perfectly playable class with enough difference from other spellcasters. If acid balling hordes of monsters is what you want, just play a wizard or priest. Others want to play in a different way (the acid balling does sound pretty boring), so they take other characters.

If there's anything to be changed, I'd go for the feature that ball spells inflict corruption on the caster :cool:

[Evil Knievel]

Some Bonus along the lines of: increase the Willpower effect in all calculations that affect elemental spells I would like to see.

Now that extreme stats are no longer easy to get, the elementalist could be the ones who still get the big ball spells :)
and i guess some more damage as well.

I would not change anything else. At least, no nerf required.