Community Proposal : Material Component Spell Costs

[renshouj]

I mean lets be honest, theres no proposal here, its just a feeler thread to see how ppl feel about the general concept of it. Personally, I can't give an opinion since my thoughts fully depend on the actual full proposal this would have.

[Aspect of Sorrow]

In general, I do not have much of an issue with a cost being applied to spells that include material components. And if this was implemented, I would much prefer the method of having the cost of components subtracted from the character's gold in order to avoid tedious micro-managing of components. However, the question "should there be a material cost?" is much different than "what is the material cost?" If this were to be pursued, what degree of cost would be expected? Because theoretically it could be something so small that it is a mere pittance and practically speaking can be ignored, or it could be exorbitant to the point one needs to take out a loan to cast his/her epic spell. And it seems to me that a key concern of those wary of this change is that the cost might ere more on the exorbitant side than the pittance side.

If it was approved, I imagine it would be something considered for the players to lay suggestion of. 1gp per spell level for example, though more threads pertaining to coin earningship that isn't just adventuring would help alleviate.

proposal,noun, pro·​pos·​al prə-ˈpō-zəl 1: an act of putting forward or stating something for consideration

Wow, really? You're going the passive-aggressive route?

There is no passive aggression, it's to help you since you've missed it on multiple occasion. Discussion for a change != a change being made, hence the use of the word proposal. Community for the community's input at large. We have an entire forum section dedicated to this.

Your posts all in all simply displays exactly another thing I've been warning about, and Goat also mentioned recently in a chat with me: Making too big changes (or too many), too quickly.

The disrespect of posting about a private conversation for a separate agenda aside, two forum threads discussing game mechanics with the community doesn't qualify for any of these points made. Do you see it somehow in the module updates, because it certainly wasn't codified, nor has it been coalesced and put to final staff discussion. We're players talking with players about concepts that can be worked on.

I'll bow out.

Thank you for the input.

Idk, however I try to look at this "proposal" I just dont see it bringing "Fun" to the table. And I dont even play a serious mage. For me this server was about Rp, I do have a wizard in my list, use to be for low level play to team up with new players on the server and craft wands. But lost interest with the crafting price, and thinking about paying to cast spells just leans more to the thought of *rcr* the wizard to something martial.

If it makes me feel like that, I can imaging pure mages or spell slingers that play the class as a main character. Not coitizing the proposal just my honest opinion on it. I dont see it bringing "Fun". I see it doing otherwise.

The material suggested side of the fence, the players had stated they wanted to see the herbalist system incorporated, or some portion of it. My personal pitch to this was regarding just the overabundant casting portion. The latter part, wherein the PvE scales down, would be one mechanism that requires less overbuffing, the coin usage toward less incentivization of casting half a spellbook to RP.

[MrSmith]

The PW's PvE rebalance would benefit from a material cost to reduce the amount of spellcasting and UMd abuse in order to accomplish PvE goals.

I know you mean well and are working on your own time to make our playing experience better. I am grateful.

To be constructive, I would like to first understand what the server's PvE goals actually are... I can't evaluate and make meaningful comments without first understanding the specified goals. Are they published? I ask because I am not sure PvE balance is, or will ever be, achievable. Why?

What's the root cause(s) of the imbalance? I honestly don't believe that question can be answered because of all the modifications done over time. Before imposing costs on characters to accomplish PvE balance... I would ask that we first start by eliminating every nerf ever implemented in game against a character. Then stop providing NPCs god-like immunities. Spelling casting and UMd use are not abuse when you are up against god-like foes. Rather, their use is easily explained by our nature to survive. Survival is instinctive and a fundamental drive that influences our behavior and decision-making in real life. The same holds true for the characters we play.

What would PvE look like under those circumstances?

Cheers!
MrSmith

[Aspect of Sorrow]

Hidden: show

The PW's PvE rebalance would benefit from a material cost to reduce the amount of spellcasting and UMd abuse in order to accomplish PvE goals.

I know you mean well and are working on your own time to make our playing experience better. I am grateful.

To be constructive, I would like to first understand what the server's PvE goals actually are... I can't evaluate and make meaningful comments without first understanding the specified goals. Are they published? I ask because I am not sure PvE balance is, or will ever be, achievable. Why?

What's the root cause(s) of the imbalance? I honestly don't believe that question can be answered because of all the modifications done over time. Before imposing costs on characters to accomplish PvE balance... I would ask that we first start by eliminating every nerf ever implemented in game against a character. Then stop providing NPCs god-like immunities. Spelling casting and UMd use are not abuse when you are up against god-like foes. Rather, their use is easily explained by our nature to survive. Survival is instinctive and a fundamental drive that influences our behavior and decision-making in real life. The same holds true for the characters we play.

What would PvE look like under those circumstances?

Cheers!
MrSmith

I'm aiming to open a discussion about that here shortly, I've been thumbing through prior staff discussions as well as players (and there's a lot of it) to try and bridge the proposal together into its own thread, while trying to also prevent the threads from getting caught up in topics that aren't specific to it. Getting these into the hands of the players to distill from and then merge back into staff for actionables (and vetos, if Goat/HDMs decide) so that we're not just treading water.

[MrSmith]

I'm aiming to open a discussion about that here shortly, I've been thumbing through prior staff discussions as well as players (and there's a lot of it) to try and bridge the proposal together into its own thread, while trying to also prevent the threads from getting caught up in topics that aren't specific to it. Getting these into the hands of the players to distill from and then merge back into staff for actionables (and vetos, if Goat/HDMs decide) so that we're not just treading water.

You want to start a constructive dialogue. Sign me up.

Cheers!
MrSmith

[Riddance]

So, did I got it right

Players use magic - > NPCs gets buffs to withstand it - >Players use more magic, starting to use that even on inconvenient times, because why not, CR6 goblin can take a blow of disentigration from lvl13 PC at this point already -> Players get nerfed (I can only see this as that) -> NPCs get nerfed (hopefully)

Why we can't just nerf NPC first so people won't need overbuff themselves and use their spell slots for something different, like RP spells?

Just was curious about that, yes

[Aspect of Sorrow]

The NPC nerf proposals based on community and staff input is coming in its own thread.

[Riddance]

Well, as for my opinion on this topic

I don't like the idea. We already have gold costs for teleportation spells and diamonds needed for resurrection line of spells. Finding material components for other spells sounds like another lair of chore and grind, while turning spellcasting into sink of gold will just straight up make me stop playing. I don't have that much of free time to grind money for the sake of playing the game normally. My characters all are broke local economy wise

[Goat]

I think it's fine to discuss this all however here. I get that the fear might be expected things, but I don't believe that at all. These are mostly just proposed ideas.

I do agree that the environment has to be looked at first when it comes to this, which 'is' something that will have to be looked at absolutely if this does get a kick. I do not exactly agree on materials being used for spells right now because of how the current server is, and I don't think we need to add more cost to spells at this time when (to me) spellcasters really aren't the issue, but that's just my opinion right now and that doesn't mean this or other things can't be discussed either. I'm in the line and a fan of involving the community on changes, people might not agree/disagree but that's my choice in the end too. I have always preferred the community hearing out. (P.S. if the community was all in majority/in favour of things, I'd see to discussing it in a heavier sense and in staff, despite my feelings on it.)

I understand though that there is fear about the community getting excited about one thing or another and if it doesn't come to be, but I don't think the community should be left in the dark either on things that may or may not come to be. I think talking about potential changes is a good thing.

And we need to stop with any passive comments please.

[DM Ink]

Personally I would ideally not like to see more gold fueled things in game. For me it's immersion breaking. I will only hear slap stick Ca-CHING sounds every time I cast. I feel it's needless and silly.

[DaloLorn]

I think it's fine to discuss this all however here. I get that the fear might be expected things, but I don't believe that at all. These are mostly just proposed ideas.

I do agree that the environment has to be looked at first when it comes to this, which 'is' something that will have to be looked at absolutely if this does get a kick. I do not exactly agree on materials being used for spells right now because of how the current server is, and I don't think we need to add more cost to spells at this time when (to me) spellcasters really aren't the issue, but that's just my opinion right now and that doesn't mean this or other things can't be discussed either. I'm in the line and a fan of involving the community on changes, people might not agree/disagree but that's my choice in the end too. I have always preferred the community hearing out. (P.S. if the community was all in majority/in favour of things, I'd see to discussing it in a heavier sense and in staff, despite my feelings on it.)

I understand though that there is fear about the community getting excited about one thing or another and if it doesn't come to be, but I don't think the community should be left in the dark either on things that may or may not come to be. I think talking about potential changes is a good thing.

And we need to stop with any passive comments please.

Upvote button when?

[BloodRiot]

I do not oppose having consumable costs. In fact I'm all for having decent consumables that are worth spending gold on.

I also do not oppose spellcasters having spell cast costs based on materials, provided the following are true: Material components are reasonably available for purchase or gathering, or abstracted and bypassed via pure gold costs. The latter is probably the better quality of life.

Whether UMD should also incur casting costs is a debate on it's own, also considering they already cost money to craft or purchase. For UMD it would perhaps make more sense to just rebalance (up) the costs of purchase on consumables across the boar, as opposed to adding casting costs, as right now npc vendors are pretty much undercutting crafters.

this leads me to the next two points that I also believe are important, should be a counter part to this and perhaps even precede this. The Crafting System and the PVE rebalance.

Otherwise, and saying this as an full UMD user, as long as the points above are addressed in a satisfactory manner, I believe I can support an idea like this.

[Rinzler]

We have a spell demand problem not a spell supply problem. It's to the point where evocation is effectively obsolete. It should not take 3 - 4 igms to take down one +/- 25 CR monster. Implementing a tax on spells would only make that problem worse.

I understand in this hypothetical scenario it comes with a PvE rebalance to reduce HP, saves, etc. on spawns. Still, I feel like a consumption tax is opening a new multiverse of challenges without attempting to fix existing things that need refinement.

I have also been on the “there’s way too much UMD” train forever. However, I feel like there are ways of tackling the over-prevalence of UMD without introducing an entirely new system.

Let's not put the cart before the horse.

[BloodRiot]

another thing to consider, is perhaps these costs make sense for some spells but not others. Epic spells having these costs i think would be easy to justify, a simple magic missile... probably not so much.

If a boss is gonna be immune to a save or suck it spell, then these powerful spells incurring casting costs just to bounce off the baddie is a slap in the face. but if these potentially encounter ending spells are indeed expected to work, then perhaps that cost is worth it.

game and encounters must create situations were the most beefed up martial will struggle, but a well placed spell will turn the tide of the encounter. imagine a circle of casters that will all attempt to cast save or die spells on the party after 2 rounds (example mechanic), maybe a bard jumping in and casting a silence is the game changing move. If that saves the party and that allows the party to loot the chest and get good things.. then perhaps a material cost really becomes a no brainer non issue.

so hitting the same key... I'm not against it on principle but this is not the first step.

[MasterSilke]

another thing to consider, is perhaps these costs make sense for some spells but not others. Epic spells having these costs i think would be easy to justify, a simple magic missile... probably not so much.

My understanding was that it would only be spells that in the game list Material as one of the components (and epic spells) which are few and far between. But I guess that then begs the question. What's the point of implementing this when only a dozen or so spells would even be impacted? Or is the M flag based on what is said of the spells in sourcebooks rather than NWN2?