Revert Temporary Dispel "Fix"

[Ravial]

Proposal: Revert the temporary dispel "fix" that was introduced during the time the overall dispel mechanic change was being overhauled but wasn't working properly.

Reasons: Originally, it was meant to be a temporary matter. Now, the server's stuck with enforcing CL 27+ for casters in order for them to feel safe from greater dispel range. However, in the community, the safe zone is 30 CL and above, in fact.

Reverting the temporary measure that increases the DC of Dispells would allow players not only to build spellcasting-based characters more comfortably, but also explore other avenues of the building that are currently underperforming due to high dispel-ability. This, in turn, leads to different roleplay arcs that characters may have due to their more flexible professions.

If memory serves me right, the Dispel DC was upped by +5 raw.

Discuss!

[Halian]

Amem, brother/sister

[Rhifox]

As far as I'm aware, the current DCs are accurate to their pnp versions (+20 for Greater Dispel). I'm not sure why that change would have been considered temporary?

I also don't really find "being in GDispel range" to be particularly troublesome, personally, as someone that has been maining a 24-25 CL caster on BG for years. There are plenty of ways of overcoming that risk.

Now, I think there could be something to be said for how common dispels are used in some zones, often by mobs that shouldn't even have them, but I don't see any issue with the current DCs of the spell itself.

[mrm3ntalist]

I also don't really find "being in GDispel range" to be particularly troublesome, personally, as someone that has been maining a 24-25 CL caster on BG for years. There are plenty of ways of overcoming that risk.

Like?

[matelener]

Just take a dispel like a man.

Some classes can counterspell. Some avoid it with HiPS. Some can comfortably rebuff multiple times.

Also, you might want to gear yourself to compensate for the buffs lost. Keep +4 AC items around. Scrolls of buffs if you need them and you're out of slots.

[Rhifox]

I also don't really find "being in GDispel range" to be particularly troublesome, personally, as someone that has been maining a 24-25 CL caster on BG for years. There are plenty of ways of overcoming that risk.

Like?

Like avoiding Serpent Hills, as that's the only area where I'd consider it actually abusive.

For other areas, all you really need is to prepare extra castings of your buffs, have scrolls on hand on the chance you run out of castings, drop silence wands on the ground beneath the dispelling mob, or be with a group of people who can eat the dispels for you. Or send a summon in first to eat the dispels.

Also, you might want to gear yourself to compensate for the buffs lost. Keep +4 AC items around.

Also yes, this. I generally wear +3 to 4 Nat, +3 to 4 Armor, +2 to 4 Dex gear on my casters. And a +4 Shield when I was still using shields. If my AC buffs get dispelled, I'm only losing some of the AC, not all of it.

[mrm3ntalist]

Just take a dispel like a man.

You mean only men can take a dispel? Like male characters - i wasnt aware of such mechanic - or male players?

Some classes can counterspell. Some avoid it with HiPS. Some can comfortably rebuff multiple times.

Also, you might want to gear yourself to compensate for the buffs lost. Keep +4 AC items around. Scrolls of buffs if you need them and you're out of slots.

For other areas, all you really need is to prepare extra castings of your buffs, have scrolls on hand on the chance you run out of castings, drop silence wands on the ground beneath the dispelling mob, or be with a group of people who can eat the dispels for you. Or send a summon in first to eat the dispels.

So your idea of casters is to treat them like Fighters with UMD. Sounds legit.

[Rhifox]

So your idea of casters is to treat them like Fighters with UMD. Sounds legit.

I treat casters as planning for all eventualities and having an answer to any issue they face, including getting dispelled.

And if I'm playing a character with low CL, it's often because I'm building that character with non-magical classes rather than being a pure mage (or, before, a Shaman/Wizard which had a million slots to recast buffs with, plus armor and shields). So, yeah, going to have fighter gear and consumables on hand.

[Halian]

Just take a dispel like a man.

Smooth...

[mrm3ntalist]

So your idea of casters is to treat them like Fighters with UMD. Sounds legit.

I treat casters as planning for all eventualities and having an answer to any issue they face, including getting dispelled.

And if I'm playing a character with low CL, it's often because I'm building that character with non-magical classes rather than being a pure mage (or, before, a Shaman/Wizard which had a million slots to recast buffs with, plus armor and shields). So, yeah, going to have fighter gear and consumables on hand.

Ye, we agree on that part. The casting classes on low CL builds are mechanically redundant. One is better off taking something else and use consumables and UMD - mechanically speaking.

[Ravial]

I have to say, I don't quite see the point of explaining what casters are. The matter is straightforward. Having anything around 25 or below is commonly seen as counterproductive to the comfort of play. Currently, it is much better of an idea to make a non-caster character with UMD as opposed to having a caster with CLbelow 27 or even 25.

Because of it, quite a good number of build concepts aren't explored because they have become redundant to your typical player.

You might want to take a dispel like a man, but I'd prefer seeing more variation with caster characters than 99% of characters being CL30 and above. It's not about gear or rebuffing. It's about people being able to actually branch out.

Mind you, I am playing a full caster character and I won't change it, but it's something I've proposed before on Dev team

[matelener]

I have to say, I don't quite see the point of explaining what casters are. The matter is straightforward. Having anything around 25 or below is commonly seen as counterproductive to the comfort of play. Currently, it is much better of an idea to make a non-caster character with UMD as opposed to having a caster with CLbelow 27 or even 25.

As someone who plays from time to time a 25 CL character that cannot avoid dispels (dragon disciple gish), I disagree with that sentiment. In regular PvE play, I feel quite comfortable eating dispels - yea sure, they sting, but what compensates it is that with all the tools at my disposal, I can solo every boss/dungeon out there bearing no cost whatsoever (except the white dragon).

Majority of non-casters don't have that luxury. UMD isn't as reliable and in addition hurts the pocket.

[Kitunenotsume]

I suspect I am of a less popular opinion, but I would support Dispel cap getting increased (rather than reduced), for reasons outlined in one of the posts I made regarding Elixirs.

The game really wasn't balanced for epic levels. If you consider that, by default, Greater Dispel Magic was supposed to be up to a caster level equal to the highest player caster (CL 20), you had a decent shot of dispelling your target. Once you increase the maximum character to level 30, your 45% dispel chance drops to 0, because the level range is 50% greater than the roll window (1-20). In effect, by going to epic levels, one creates a window of immunity to a spell that was never present in the initial scale.

By increasing the cap for Dispel Magic to permit a higher CL bonus to the roll even by 1 (to 21), it removes the immunity window (possibly against anyone without an artificially buffed CL, like red wizards or hierophants), but only when casters are opposing casters. The situation with or against UMD provided buffs would not change - because their CLs are not changing and a 20+ CL was already going to strip UMD, but the overall dynamic of the spell would permit the spell to be an equitable threat.

Addendum: My opinion would be G-Dispel should have a cap of +23 (Halfway between 15 and 30 for Dispel Magic (15) and Disjunction(30+), respectively)

[yyj]

I would say no, mainly because this would only make already OP builds even more ridiculous (looking at every FvS build for example but there are others)

[Hoihe]

I have to say, I don't quite see the point of explaining what casters are. The matter is straightforward. Having anything around 25 or below is commonly seen as counterproductive to the comfort of play. Currently, it is much better of an idea to make a non-caster character with UMD as opposed to having a caster with CLbelow 27 or even 25.

As someone who plays from time to time a 25 CL character that cannot avoid dispels (dragon disciple gish), I disagree with that sentiment. In regular PvE play, I feel quite comfortable eating dispels - yea sure, they sting, but what compensates it is that with all the tools at my disposal, I can solo every boss/dungeon out there bearing no cost whatsoever (except the white dragon).

Majority of non-casters don't have that luxury. UMD isn't as reliable and in addition hurts the pocket.

If you are spending all your spell slots on buffing....


why are you even playing a caster and not a fighter with umd?

A mage should be using their spells to alter the battlefield and curse/debuff or displace their enemies.

not... pretend to be a worse fighter.


I played a 25 cl gish and hated it. The gameplay was that of a crappy fighter.

so i went for a 19 cl wiz 15/swas5/sd3/du7. I still had to spend all my spell slots on buffs making me ask "what do these wizard levels even do?! I am just a shitty discount fighter"

So i went for 9 cl wiz 5/swash14/sd3/du7.

my gameplay didnt change. in fact i became a BETTER wizard since i could actually afford to memorize spells other than a million buffs and actually be a mage!
Is this nornal?! No. It is utterly ridiculous that only having 5 wizard levels plays more like a real wizard.


And 30 cl? buff up a summon and afk. Or shapechange into something. Very wizard gameplay. Totally not a discount fighter by proxy. discount fighter that vould just use umd instead and not be as useless