07-11-2018, 10:03 PM | #11 | |
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Coquitlam B.C.
|
Re: Should all spells be equally easy to learn?
Quote:
Thanks for pointing that out. The rules for this do seem to be all over. Warm regards, Rick |
|
07-11-2018, 10:31 PM | #12 | |
Join Date: Jul 2018
|
Re: Detect Enemies - Tweak?
Quote:
Last edited by John Brinegar; 07-11-2018 at 10:39 PM. Reason: Typo remival |
|
07-11-2018, 10:40 PM | #13 |
Join Date: Jul 2018
|
Re: Should all spells be equally easy to learn?
|
07-11-2018, 10:44 PM | #14 | ||||
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Coquitlam B.C.
|
Re: Detect Enemies - Tweak?
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Warm regards, Rick. Last edited by Rick_Smith; 07-11-2018 at 11:00 PM. |
||||
07-11-2018, 10:58 PM | #15 |
Join Date: Jul 2018
|
Re: Detect Enemies - Tweak?
And I do not feel that it is as easy or as practical as you seem to. But I would agree that if you are concerned that the spell will be used this way, your tweak is a reasonable solution.
|
07-12-2018, 12:02 AM | #16 |
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Arizona
|
Re: Should all spells be equally easy to learn?
Turning to the original question; I could see varying the XP cost to learn a new spell by the IQ. Given the "100 XP" cost currently being described, I would suggest something along the lines of "10 XP x IQ level of the spell" -- that is, an IQ 8 Spell would cost 80 XP to learn, and an IQ 20 Spell would cost 200 XP to learn. Given that higher IQ spells are both more complex and have greater effects, this seems like a good compromise in spell learning.
Naturally, for non-Wizard types, the cost would still be three times as high (i.e., 240 XP for that level 8 Spell, and 600 XP for that level 20 Spell). Last edited by JLV; 07-12-2018 at 12:33 AM. |
07-12-2018, 12:30 AM | #17 | |
Join Date: May 2018
|
Re: Is the Trance Spell ideal?
Quote:
|
|
07-12-2018, 12:37 AM | #18 |
Join Date: May 2018
|
Re: Insubstantiality - Make harder to learn.
|
07-12-2018, 01:37 AM | #19 | |
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: London Uk, but originally from Scotland
|
Re: Should all spells be equally easy to learn?
Quote:
Like everything in TFT, I compare the difficulty of the thing to the relevant attribute. So if an IQ18 Wizard wants to learn an IQ8 spell, it still takes one "slot" but is cheap in XP to learn. In fact I might allow more than 1 spell of that level per slot. I used to have a table that laid this out but it's long gone. And I'd like to say that Insubstantiality was the favourite Spell of my Magician, Mallengar (the Magnificent), so I'd be against mucking around with it! |
|
07-12-2018, 01:56 AM | #20 | |
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Coquitlam B.C.
|
Re: Should all spells be equally easy to learn?
Quote:
I rather like this. It feels proper to me that high IQ spells would take more effort to learn than the easy ones. Your second paragraph also suggests a reason why non-wizards would tend to pick up the lower IQ spells. The tripled experience (XP) cost is significant. Warm regards, Rick. |
|
Tags |
ease to learn, memory, problematic spell, spells, talents |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|