Sunflare

[BriarFox]

Idea I posted on the officials:

The point of a semi, to my mind, is that one can choose whether to be more of a pure, more of a square, or something in-between. Bards, for instance, can more or less be pures. Yet, rangers can't, and what's holding us back is largely the lack of the possibility of a low-level direct-damage CS spell, much like Stunning Shout (1008). If we had such a spell, it'd finally be possible for a ranger to go a true "druid" path, while it isn't now.

Thus, I'd like to suggest a change to Sunburst (609): With 20 ranks in summoning lore, the caster would unlock the direct damage effects of 609, with this version of the spell being known as "Sunflare." The spell would call on the power of Phoen to deal fire-damage based on warding success. Further training in summoning lore and dedication to the ranger circle would make the spell more effective. This version of the spell could be activated by CHANNELing it, as opposed to the other effects of Sunburst, which are activated by CASTing it. The spell would also require one open hand to be cast.

[mgoddess]

Quite interesting... I like it, though I would add on a blinding affect (similar to 135) to the damage, since it's still a "sun burst/flare"

[droit]

Now that you mention it, it does sort of sound like a single target 135, which would be quite cool. The problem with 135, IMO, isn't the effects, but the mana cost.

[graysun]

Great ideas, both.

Not that rangers are underpowered or anything, but it might make it so we could hunt more like pures - without being 1.5x cap.

[BriarFox]

Updated this idea on the officials slightly. I also posted a brief idea wondering about a single-target 635.


Actually, let me elaborate on that 609 idea from a fresher perspective:

#609 - Sunburst/Sunflare.

Unlocks at 20 ranks of Summoning lore. Direct-damage CS spell dealing fire criticals. Variant is invoked by CHANNELing the spell. Can be cast in offensive with an open hand for higher damage. The spell could use the fire criticals table and damage could increase with Summoning lore ranks - 20 similarly to how Summoning increases 110 damage.

You gesture while summoning the spirits of nature to aid you with the Sun Burst spell...
Your spell is ready.

>channel griffin

You gesture at a war griffin.
Burning streamers of light flare forth from your hand toward a war griffin!
CS: +423 - TD: +360 + CvA: +25 + d100: +39 == +127
Warding failed!
A war griffin recoils from the burning light!
... hit for 25 points of damage!
... hit 10 points of damage!
Nasty burns to right arm. Gonna need lots of butter.
Cast Roundtime 3 Seconds.
(Forcing stance down to guarded)

I think the spell's in line with current lore distributions and, more importantly, fits the conception of rangers as the less-magical semi. The spell is more expensive to cast than 1008 and requires significant (200 MTPs) lore training, plus more lore training to be more effective. It allows for another option, but one with costs, as the design principle seems to be these days.

[Jace Solo]

And what would you give to paladins to allow them a chance to hunt more like a pure? I know you're in the same boat with you current spell setup as they are with 1615....

Add crushing damage to 1602 after a certain amount of summing lore in conjunction with the slowing effect?

Or plasma/water/impact damage to 1604?

[BriarFox]

And what would you give to paladins to allow them a chance to hunt more like a pure? I know you're in the same boat with you current spell setup as they are with 1615....

Add crushing damage to 1602 after a certain amount of summing lore in conjunction with the slowing effect?

Or plasma/water/impact damage to 1604?

Well, they're the least magical semi, so I'd probably modify 1615, and make it cost a ton of lore if I were going to do it. They really already have that DD CS spell.

[Donquix]

I think an interesting avenue to explore would be to not make it a CS spell, but a maneuver spell. Like mini-spike thorn. So the "druid" path would focus on maneuver spells as its niche.

[Jace Solo]

How about lore reduces the mana cost.

It's not viable to use with the cost of sigils and all that other nonsense. Or with the cost of lores, etc...at 40 I feel like a warrior with less maneuvers and no berz. Hoping I can start using some spells to hunt in the near future.

[BriarFox]

I think an interesting avenue to explore would be to not make it a CS spell, but a maneuver spell. Like mini-spike thorn. So the "druid" path would focus on maneuver spells as its niche.

That'd be cool, though I'll bet you that another maneuver spell would be ruled out for being "overpowered." It'd be consistent, though.

[Jace Solo]

Honestly, I'm loving this idea. I'd love to play a Druid!

[BriarFox]

Honestly, I'm loving this idea. I'd love to play a Druid!

First you have to convert to Imaera and plant a rose bush in the sacrificed corpse of your first-born.

[Parker]

You know....

While I understand the wish to be a 'pure' semi, Rangers are semis for a reason...

As it stands right now, Paladins are very squarish, while rangers sit pretty evenly between both, with bards leaning further to the pure side of things.

On a scale of Square to Pure, I personally think it would look something like this;

Square: Warrior--Rogue--Paladin--Ranger--Bard--cleric--empath--wizard--sorcerer :Pure


I really don't see it being necessary to swing bards, rangers, or paladins even CLOSER to the pure side of things, As there's already four pure classes in comparison to 2 square ones.

[BriarFox]

You know....

While I understand the wish to be a 'pure' semi, Rangers are semis for a reason...

As it stands right now, Paladins are very squarish, while rangers sit pretty evenly between both, with bards leaning further to the pure side of things.

On a scale of Square to Pure, I personally think it would look something like this;

Square: Warrior--Rogue--Paladin--Ranger--Bard--cleric--empath--wizard--sorcerer :Pure


I really don't see it being necessary to swing bards, rangers, or paladins even CLOSER to the pure side of things, As there's already four pure classes in comparison to 2 square ones.


It's not that the whole class would swing that way, but that it would provide an (expensive) option to do it. That fits with what I understand current development goals to be - possibility, through sacrifice.

[Parker]

It's not that the whole class would swing that way, but that it would provide an (expensive) option to do it. That fits with what I understand current development goals to be - possibility, through sacrifice.

With the exception of paladins, doesn't this already exist?

Even at the mid-level ranges, couldn't a bard or ranger hunt with songs/spikethorn? It would be highly sacrificial, but possible.

[Donquix]

It's a pretty small change, doesn't hurt anything and lets people achieve a type of character, conceptually for combat and RP, that is pretty lacking right now in GS.

I don't see how that's bad in any way.

Of course the true solution that I've mentioned before is to add an actual druid class as the mental/elemental or mental/spirtual (since apparently it's not empaths...lawl) hybrid pure.

Druids: RSN 2054

[BriarFox]

With the exception of paladins, doesn't this already exist?

Even at the mid-level ranges, couldn't a bard or ranger hunt with songs/spikethorn? It would be highly sacrificial, but possible.

Bards can, with 1002, 1008, and focused 1030. 16 mana is too expensive for rangers to do it until near cap, and it's very tough then. A lower-level CS spell would supplement 616 and 635 and make a "druid" path feasible in terms of mana before cap (90% of the population), as well as slightly expanding the options available to such a caster. It shouldn't be easy, but it should be possible.

[BriarFox]

It's a pretty small change, doesn't hurt anything and lets people achieve a type of character, conceptually for combat and RP, that is pretty lacking right now in GS.

I don't see how that's bad in any way.

Of course the true solution that I've mentioned before is to add an actual druid class as the mental/elemental or mental/spirtual (since apparently it's not empaths...lawl) hybrid pure.

Druids: RSN 2054

A true druid class should have minor elemental, minor spiritual, and Druid spells, in my mind.

[Donquix]

A true druid class should have minor elemental, minor spiritual, and Druid spells, in my mind.

I agree, but the elemental/spirtual is sorcs, and i see mental/spirtual or m/e working fine as well

[Drew]

I agree, but the elemental/spirtual is sorcs, and i see mental/spirtual or m/e working fine as well

Druids shouldn't be a spiritual class, they should be an elemental class. Just like rangers, they are MnS for balance reasons, but really should be ranger/MnE. Bards should be spiritual, both classes are flavoured to the wrong side.

[Donquix]

Agreed, but you have to work within the system at this point.

[Danical]

Druids shouldn't be a spiritual class, they should be an elemental class. Just like rangers, they are MnS for balance reasons, but really should be ranger/MnE. Bards should be spiritual, both classes are flavoured to the wrong side.

MnM, not MnS.

Although, bards are the cheerleaders of GS. WE GOT SPIRIT, YES WE DO!

[Jace Solo]

Take MnE from bards, give the MnM

Take MnS from Rangers, give the MnE

Druids, MjE, MjS, Druid Circle....whaaaa?
Druid circle would have a lot of defensive spells that would normally be picked up in the minor areas BUT they would be nature themed AND sharable/groupable so to fill a party buffer.

Spells like, (I know the name has been used before) Regrowth (mass) that allow and extra +2-3 mana and health regen and +5 when grouped with the druid...further trainable from lores to get to +5 and +10.

I feel like rangers already have a spell like this but what about a Thornshield, that is basically adding reactive flares the the armor of the wearer (opposite of guiding light to sanct'd armor).

I'm sure I could make an entire spell list of utility and, defense and an attack or two for the druid circle that would balance nicely with the other Major Circles.

It's just a thought

[Drew]

Giving rangers MnE would give them a ton of extra AS and DS they don't have right now. Originally I was thinking it would make them way overpowered but it would come with one big weakness, they'd lose a lot of TD.

[SpiffyJr]

I'd rather have the TD.

[Fallen]

Giving rangers MnE would give them a ton of extra AS and DS they don't have right now. Originally I was thinking it would make them way overpowered but it would come with one big weakness, they'd lose a lot of TD.

They'd gain E-wave, 425, and 430. They'd be in heaven. It would also mean 613 & 618 imbeds for all!

[droit]

I disagree that rangers/druids are "elementally flavored." When I think of the elemental circle of spells, I picture it as the various elemental benders from Avatar: The Last Airbender, directly manipulating the elements. That doesn't fit the classic druid at all. The whole communing with nature stereotype is far more spiritual than elemental.

[IorakeWarhammer]

I vote yes on this.

[Firestorm Killa]

Rangers and Druids are more spiritual in my opinion. Reason why is they are more focused on the spiritual side of nature, like communicating with animals etc.
Rangers are fine as they are.
I see druids as having MnS, MjS, Druid. After all, druids are nothing more then priests technically.