We hate Warlocks

For those curious about the title of this thread, in World of Warcraft the Warlock class has this annoying tendency to just keep stacking DoTs on their enemies until they almost literally just melt. At least, they used to have that annoying tendency. Don't know if they still do, because I haven't played the game for over two years.

Anyway, the point here is this: currently trying to use a DoT in your Signature Spells is just a bad idea. That's pretty much it. The reason for that is that there is a rule in place which says that a spell with a duration must always have a cooldown, and I'm pretty sure the cooldown must always be longer than the spell itself.

Signature Spells are in the unique position where most of them have zero cooldown along with no mana cost. Because they're meant to be spammable. A fire mage can each post just throw one fireball, the fireball's strength depending on the rank of the fire mage, but the only thing it does is burn whatever it touches. It can't explode or anything else.

Now, I'm going to show two potential Signature Spells. So far as I know neither of these are actually in use, but they are both very realistic and simple spells which one could decide to use if they're the appropriate type of mage.

First example:

Iron Dragon's Claw
Rank: B-Rank
Type: Offensive/Physical (I'd say Iron but that feels weird)
Duration: Instant
Description: the user's hand or foot of choice is turned into the claw of a dragon, forged from iron. With this claw the user can perform one attack, with enough strength that upon hit the target suffers B-Rank damage (60hp). This claw attack can also cut and slice like with a real claw. After the attack the iron claw merges back into the actual hand.

A very, extremely straightforward and spammable spell. It just enhances your attack so it actually hurts.

Second example:

Venom Devil's Strike
Rank: B-Rank
Type: Offensive/Poison
Duration: Instant/2 posts (DoT)
Description: gathering foul magic around their limb of choice the user can strike at the target with the enhanced limb, dealing 1/2B-Rank damage (30hp). Upon touch the target is also poisoned for three posts, suffering another 3/4B-Rank in damage over the duration (45hp, 15hp/post). Attacking the same target over and over will refresh the duration of the poison but the damage done each post will stay the same. This spell only allows for one attack before the gathered magic dissipates. Poisoned enemies may be hindered by the pain they experience from the poison, depending on how tough they are.

Another very typical enhancer of your strikes, only this one comes from a mage who specializes in using venom and poison instead of turning their body into iron.

Now, the interesting part: the cooldown that the first example would have following the current rules? 0. It's an instant very straightforward spell, so it doesn't need a cooldown.

The second example? 4 posts. Because it has a DoT that lasts three posts.

The first example does 60hp damage total the moment that you hit somebody. The second example does 75hp damage total. Over the course of three posts.

However the first example, requiring no cooldown because it's a very simple and instant effect, can also be used in the next round. So that leaves us with the first example making it possible to deal 120hp damage in the same two rounds that the second example can deal 60hp damage.

And the third round? The first example goes again, adding another 60hp damage so we end up with a total of 180hp. Second example adds another 15hp/post for a total of 75hp.

Fourth round. First example adds another attack, total damage is now 240hp.
The second example is still waiting for the cooldown because it's a DoT of three posts and thus has a cooldown of four posts. Total damage for second example now is 75hp, because the DoT only lasts two posts so in the third post nothing happened.

Fifth round. First example adds 60hp damage, total damage done is 300hp. Second example can now attack again because the cooldown is over, adding 30hp from the attack and 15hp from the DoT that starts ticking. So the total for the second example is...120hp

The Iron Dragon's Claw did more than twice the damage of the Venom Devil's Strike.

Now, let's assume that for some reason the Venom Devil's Strike was also given no cooldown. Maybe it just slipped past the staff or something. Let's see how they hold up then.

Iron Dragon's Claw=ID
Venom Devil's Strike=VDe

First round:
ID deals 60hp damage.
VDe deals 30hp on hit+15hp from poison=45hp.

Second round:
ID deals 60hp damage, total damage done=120hp.
VDe deals 30hp on hit, DoT of 15hp/post is still active so that's 45hp, total damage done=90hp

Third round:
ID deals 60hp damage, total damage done=180hp
VDe deals 30hp on hit, DoT of 15hp/post results in 45hp damage, total damage done=135hp

Because a DoT can only deal 1/2 their Rank's damage with the initial attack and 1/4 their Rank's damage with each round, resulting in 3/4 Rank's damage each post, the VDe starts to lag behind

Now for some reason both the ID and the VDe don't attack their target for the following two posts. The ID gains nothing because all his damage is on the instant of attack, so he stays at 180hp. The VDe gains two ticks of 15hp/post so his damage ends up at 165hp.

The ID has less damage than the VDe if they both only attack once, the same amount of damage if they both attack twice, and after that the ID has more damage and the difference keeps increasing for each consecutive round of attack.

This is but one example, but I don't think it would change much if I changed the ranks. Actually, I might as well see how it changes.

Updating ID and VDe to rank A:
ID: instantly deals 80hp damage.
VDe: instantly deals 40hp damage (look up), DoT of 60hp damage over three posts, so 20hp/post. Total damage: 100hp damage.

Let's put it through the grinder.

First round:
ID: 80hp damage, total damage done=80hp
VDe: 40hp damage, DoT of 20hp/post starts ticking, total damage done=60hp

Second round:
ID: 80hp damage, total damage done=160hp
VDe: 40hp damage, DoT of 20hp/post, total damage done=120hp.

Third round:
ID: 80hp damage, total damage done=240hp
VDe: 40hp damage, DoT of 20hp/post, total damage done=180hp

Both now don't attack for two rounds so the VDe DoT runs out. That adds another 30hp, ending the comparison at 240hp for ID and 210 for VDe.

If somebody feels like checking my math it would be appreciated, but I think I got it right.

Anyway, so on a single target the DoT, even if it has no cooldown so you can apply it again each post, loses against an Instant which just punches the target each post. The DoT is only stronger if it's a single attack and after that it just starts lagging behind.

I also calculated what would happen if we added hand-to-hand damage to each strike. The results were basically the same.

Now, for the sake of completion, let's add an example of if there are three targets instead of one, and both ID and VDe keep switching between targets.

First round:
ID:
1st target receives 80hp damage.
2nd target is unharmed.
3rd target is unharmed.
VDe:
1st target receives 40hp damage+DoT of 20hp/post for a total of 60hp.
2nd target is unharmed.
3rd target is unharmed.

Second round:
ID:
1st target 80hp damage total.
2nd target 80hp damage total.
3rd target is unharmed.
VDe:
1st target 60+20=80hp damage total.
2nd target 60hp damage total.
3rd target is unharmed.

Third round:
ID:
1st target 80hp damage total.
2nd target 80hp damage total.
3rd target 80hp damage total.
VDe:
1st target 80+20=100hp damage total.
2nd target 60+20=80hp damage total.
3rd target 60hp damage total.

Fourth round:
ID:
1st target 80+80=160hp damage total.
2nd target 80hp damage total.
3rd target 80hp damage total.
VDe:
1st target 100+60=160hp damage total.
2nd target 80+20=100hp damage total.
3rd target 60+20=80hp damage total.

So...we learn that the VDe has an advantage when fighting multiple enemies.
However that advantage isn't an overwhelming one which completely puts the ID out of the competition.

More importantly, it doesn't remove the fact that against a single target the ID won the competition.

Realize that if the VDe had to follow the current rules about cooldowns he would have lost the competition both against a single target and multiple targets. Actually, he just wouldn't compete. He'd be trampled and forgotten.

Now I would ask of people to explain why the VDe would require a cooldown. Because so far as I can see just because it is a DoT doesn't mean it's automatically so strong that it requires the cooldown to keep it balanced. In fact the cooldown would immediately cripple it to the extent of being worthless.

And yes, I do realize that this is only one example of a Signature Spell with a duration. However it does look like an example which immediately questions the rule that a Signature Spell with a duration requires a cooldown. And if this one does it, who's to say other examples wouldn't?

If the only argument is 'because it's in the rules', I'll have to invoke the piece of wisdom which goes as follows: 'rules have no merit in their own right. They're tools.'

Of course now I'm really hoping I got my math right otherwise I'll look rather silly.

To be honest with how signature spells were designed they are meant to be simple single effect spell.
They are meant to be the equivalent of a melee weapon. As in something simple like throwing a ball of energy. A damage over time wouldn't fit that. Especially the one you used as its an instaneous blow plus the damage over time aka two effects.


In my mind signature spells should always be quick instantaneous effects. A shadow sword to add an extra bit to an attack. An energy ball you can fire each post. A simple teleport you can use each post. A shield you can throw up each post etc.

They are meant to be simple and they already cost zero mp.

In fact, signature spells in the character perks thread have been updated to reflect this statement on what signature spells should be. Its no real change on what was already there just a slight clarification

Let's rephrase the example so that the Venom Des Strike only injects poison without doing instant damage on hit. Bam single effect.

In the spirit of Signature Spells they should reflect the core idea of the magic(tis where the name came from). If the core idea is DoT it should be a valid option  to have a DoT Sig Spell.

Broken keyboard keeping it brief.

Signature spells were designed initially as alternates for weapons. Thats why you can trade out weapons for them. As some people want to be pure mages and thus aren't the type to swing around swords. They are meant to be simplistic things.

As there are far fewer limits on what spells can do now (as in there aren't as many set damage thresholds) then I don't see what the issue is. I don't see why the system should be changed or bent to fit this.

-----------------
This argument that Akeya has produced is very well written and like i've said before i'll consider it and try to incorporate it in. At best I could see it perhaps having a lowered cooldown.

However, in this same vein we might as well remove cooldowns entirely because the EXACT same argument can be made for normal spells. In fact, it makes less sense for them to have cooldowns because they actually have a cost to be used.

The argument also ignores the factor of other spells in a mage's arsenal. They don't rely on a single spell. Also as a slayer (to use this example) they also have enhanced melee combat. So the fact that one signature spell type might trump another (potentially) shouldn't be a factor as you have a lot of other spells.

-----------------------
Now to use the venom demon slayer as an example. There is nothing to stop you launching a regular damage over time spell from your magic and using this to buff that spell in some way. Perhaps to make the damage over time last a post longer or do a bit more damage per post.

There are plenty of ways to use the system as it is to acheive your goal without the system being changed.

This argument doesn't work for normal spells because Signature Spells are so far the only spells allowed to have zero cooldown. Only for duration based Signature Spells to suddenly be exempt from that rule.

If the Iron Dragon's Claw was a normal B-Rank spell instead of a Signature Spell it'd get a cooldown of four or five posts, because that's the cooldown most B-Rank spells get that aren't very powerful or last very long. So with normal spells Venom Devil's Strike could get the four post cooldown duration no problem because the Iron Dragon's Claw would also have four posts.

It's specifically that currently Signature Spells are only meant to be useful if the spell has an instant effect. An instant attack with no cooldown versus a DoT with a cooldown at least one post longer than the duration isn't one spell being somewhat stronger than the other, it's two spells standing at completely different levels in terms of power. It would be fine if Instant effects just were a bit more useful, but the current difference just tells all mages 'make your Signature Spell instant or you'll suffer for it.'

I'm not sure about other people, but I see this as a bad thing. Yes Signature Spells are supposed to give mages who don't want to act as battle mages to have a way of dealing with mages who just grab a weapon to beat you over the head with, but that doesn't mean that it has to purely be instant effects.

For example I could see as a Signature Spell some cold-based mage spamming some kind of chill blast which does nothing but slow those hit by it. That would allow them to keep enemies at a safe distance and make them easier to hit with their more powerful spells, and with it being their Signature Spell it would certainly fit as the core of cold-based magic.

Or for the ice person they could just use the same effect each post. Or for the poison mage they could just do a poison attack each turn. Nothing stopping them doing that and getting the same damage. Yes thats not the same as a damage over time, but its a way of doing it. They are meant to be the equivalent of weapons. Weapons don't do damage over time.

However, like I have said its on the backlog.

Here's an idea for duration-based signature spells. They have no cooldown for the spell itself, but you can have them either not stack (so if you have a DoT sig spell, each time you hit someone with it, it just refreshes the duration, but doesn't deal extra damage), OR you could give them a target-based cooldown. You can use your DoT sig spell as many times as you want, but only on different targets (well you could technically use it on the same target, but it'd have no effect), once something is hit by your sig spell with a duration, it is immune for the spell's duration+1. For anyone who has played League of Legends, it would be somewhat like Udyr's bear stance.

That just complicates things a bit too much because dig spells are supposed to be simplistic.

You can have a DoT sig spell but it will only give the DoT for its effect meaning no damage on until hit and due to the rules any sig spell with a duration, such as a DoT spell needs to have a CD equal to or greater than the duration. Also this DoT spell will have to follow the rules for DoT damage per post which is 25% of rank per post. Simple but at the same time you are better off not trying to take a route using a sig spell and use an actual spell for a full DoT spell.

There should be no issue with what we have up for rules right now because of the amount of options given through your other spells. Remember sig spells are one simple effect as stated in the rules. Hope this helps with understanding them more.

Cirven wrote: and due to the rules any sig spell with a duration, such as a DoT spell needs to have a CD equal to or greater than the duration.

This being exactly what I want to change.

This thread was not formed through lack of understanding. This thread was formed through viewing a rule as flawed and trying to make an argument for it to be changed.

And no, I did not mean DoT spells in general. It's very specifically Signature Duration Spells.

Akeya wrote:

Cirven wrote: and due to the rules any sig spell with a duration, such as a DoT spell needs to have a CD equal to or greater than the duration.

This being exactly what I want to change.

This thread was not formed through lack of understanding. This thread was formed through viewing a rule as flawed and trying to make an argument for it to be changed.

And no, I did not mean DoT spells in general. It's very specifically Signature Duration Spells.

We know and we have said for now no. It is not an issue at all and is a way to balance it out because otherwise we do have people spamming duration spells over and over for free which goes against what we have on site and brings imbalance to things.

Sorry but this will probably not happen at all.

Cirven wrote:

Akeya wrote:

Cirven wrote: and due to the rules any sig spell with a duration, such as a DoT spell needs to have a CD equal to or greater than the duration.

This being exactly what I want to change.

This thread was not formed through lack of understanding. This thread was formed through viewing a rule as flawed and trying to make an argument for it to be changed.

And no, I did not mean DoT spells in general. It's very specifically Signature Duration Spells.

We know and we have said for now no. It is not an issue at all and is a way to balance it out because otherwise we do have people spamming duration spells over and over for free which goes against what we have on site and brings imbalance to things.

Sorry but this will probably not happen at all.

In the opening post of this thread I have mathematically proven that Duration Signature Spells would not be overpowered when compared to Instant Signature Spells even if you removed the cooldowns.

The imbalance card has become unavailable after it was smashed to pieces using cold hard facts.

Zack's argument that Signature Spells were never meant to work like that, while annoying, is still valid.

Another issue that has to be taken into account here AKeya:

1. Duration based spells (over their duration) do more damage than an instant spell (this is for normal spells and I realise doesn't quite work for signatures).
2. This 'higher damage' requires you to hit said target once. Your iron slayer example requires you to hit them multiple times.

Also not all duration based spells are damage over time. So you are over generalising the point a bit.

Akeya wrote:

Cirven wrote:

Akeya wrote:

Cirven wrote: and due to the rules any sig spell with a duration, such as a DoT spell needs to have a CD equal to or greater than the duration.

This being exactly what I want to change.

This thread was not formed through lack of understanding. This thread was formed through viewing a rule as flawed and trying to make an argument for it to be changed.

And no, I did not mean DoT spells in general. It's very specifically Signature Duration Spells.

We know and we have said for now no. It is not an issue at all and is a way to balance it out because otherwise we do have people spamming duration spells over and over for free which goes against what we have on site and brings imbalance to things.

Sorry but this will probably not happen at all.

In the opening post of this thread I have mathematically proven that Duration Signature Spells would not be overpowered when compared to Instant Signature Spells even if you removed the cooldowns.

The imbalance card has become unavailable after it was smashed to pieces using cold hard facts.

Zack's argument that Signature Spells were never meant to work like that, while annoying, is still valid.

Your example only showed a damage duration type of spell but what if we had a spell that stunned a person with no cooldown? They could just constantly spam that spell to keep a person stunned over and over. That is the issue here, not the damage.

Speed Demon Zack wrote:Another issue that has to be taken into account here AKeya:

1. Duration based spells (over their duration) do more damage than an instant spell (this is for normal spells and I realise doesn't quite work for signatures).
2. This 'higher damage' requires you to hit said target once. Your iron slayer example requires you to hit them multiple times.

Also not all duration based spells are damage over time. So you are over generalising the point a bit.

I used a DoT because it's a lot easier to compare DoTs and Instant damage then using some other Duration based spells.

Also, the higher damage isn't that much a difference, and if you're in range to inflict your DoT using the example I gave you would also be in the position to punch them with the Instant spell, the Venom Devil's Strike being a touch effect even if we remove the on hit damage to make it a single effect.

The difference in power would be something that rather than being inherently broken could be rather easily balanced.

I mean, I could try to use math on some other examples, but I used this one as an example because it shows at least one type of Duration Signature Spell which would not break the game or be unbalanced if it had no cooldown, without requiring very weak numbers.

EDIT: In regards to the stun, that has nothing to do with duration. Duration would just make that slightly easier to do. If somebody creates a spell or combination of spells that allows infinite stunlock that's more an overall imbalance than something which can be laid at the feet of Duration effects.

AYe, but creation a rule for one particular scenario just makes things more complex than needed. Things are simple as they are.

I don't think removing the line 'A signature spell can be one with a duration but the cooldown will have to be equal to or greater than that duration.' from the rules regarding Signature Spells would make things that much more complicated, but I'll leave the topic be for now. As long as it at least has made people think about the idea again.

What I mean for the complexity is that you've proven for damage spells this is fine. For paralysing spells, debuffs, buffs etc this isn't really so and thus we'd have to change the rules so 'if its a damage over time spell then it doesn't need a cooldown, but in all other duration situations it needs one'