Elemental: It's Fun to Charm Stuff...

The problem with such a formula is that it makes differences in level almost inconsequential, except for huge differences (level 20 versus level 5) or with weak spells (STRENGTH = 20, but to a whole stack, for example).

But aren't units going to have a magical defense rating? If so, why not use it to determine the odds of charming? So you could have : charming probability = 1 - TARGET MAGIC DEFENSE / (STRENGTH + PARENT LVL).

Meh sounds fine to me. Now on to more important matters, can I get in the beta yet.

I wonder how long I can ask the same question before I get smacked with a giant ban hammer.

Wow, great post boogie!  I like the current scenario well enough, but what if we had to maintain control over units with mana upkeep? You know in order to keep the units will as ours. This would make our decision a little more important. Make us weigh our options more. Will we be able to charm enemy units as well? I think that would be an interesting implementation for spying   

I think units with a "powerful mind" should be able to resist these charms easier, while unintelligent beings (spiders and trolls) should be easy to take control of and have a low upkeep. But of course upkeep should probably be determined by the attack strength of the unit for balance sake.

First we will send waves of spiders to wear them down... then the trolls, then a dragon, and finish them off with da bears! Only a few more days!

Charming, as you describe it, lacks something : a "level" of charming : will the charmed unit obey your orders as a zealot ? Has it some brains remaining ? What will happen to the unit when the charm will stop ?

So, some things should be added :

When you cham someone, you can have 3 results : a weak, a normal and a strong.

A weak result will give you access to the unit, but not its combat skills (for instance),, a normal just give you control, and a strong result will give you a zealot unit that hjave enhanced stats.

Maybe even better results : the charmed unit will stay with you forever.

Or worse results : maybe you damaged the unit forever (Braaaaaaaaains ....)

And what would happen if you fail the spell ? A free attack from the unit ? That unit gets enhanced attack against units from the charmer ? Or maybe the charmed unit is "just" scared ?

Everything seems fine, except that a level1 caster shouldn't be able to use max lv charm. Casters should have to gain experience and lv up before they can cast rediculously powerful spells. LV 100(100 strength?) charm should require a lv 50 caster or something of the like. If you did this, you wouldn't have to factor in the level of the caster at all. The charm could have a strength, the monster could have a level, and any other modifiers could also come into play. S=strength  l=monster level and x=any other modifier(magic resistance). So the new formula would be s-l(-, /, or *)x= probability. If s=20 l=1 and x=5% magic resistance then the probability would look like this. (20-1)*.95= 18.05% probability. Just raise the strength of charm and you simplify the equation by a lot, AND you solve the caster level requirement ordeal. In the old system, a level 1 caster with a level 1 charm(1 strength?), trying to charm a level one monster, would have a 1% probability. If a level 1 caster can use a level 1 charm(level 1 charm has 10 strength for example), you have a 9% probability. Then a level 5 caster can get a level 2 charm(15 strength), a level 10 can get a level 3 charm(25 strength). etc. IDK, it just makes more sense to me, and it works just as well. Why factor in the level of the caster? Why does it matter how many dragons he has slain, or armies he has lead. When it comes down to it, the only thing that matter is the strength of the spell. His experiences thus far determine if he can cast said spell, not how well he casts it. IF you were to take that route, the only experience related factor that should modify the probability of the spell should be how many times the caster has used the spell, and how effective those uses were.

Units with massive willpower should be able to resist charm most of the time, things like paladins and demons and such. On the other hand, units like zombies(or equivlent if applicable) should be flat out immune, since there is no brain to charm.

Perhaps also add a thrall or gaes spell that you can cast on your own troops to permantly bind them to you? Not only makes them immune to charm but also decreses upkeep since you don't need to pay magically bound units. Or, could we charm our own units to keep from having to pay them?

Also, It would be cool if charm wore off or could be broken free of. Charming that mountain gaint might have given you a huge advantage in the battle, but you need to keep troops near it who can handle it, in case it suddenly breaks free and starts beating on your army.

Charm can easily be one of the strongest spells in the game, and should be, as there is nothing more dangerous then a foe using your own forces against you, but at the same time, turning the game into a charm fest would get old fast.

This sounds great but i can see one possible source of imbalance in the fact the level difference does not "hurt" enough imo for low end spells.

Right now a difference of one lvl between mob lvl and caster lvl always has the same impact on your ability to charm the creature: 1%.  It makes it possible to charm creatures high above your level with early charm spells. It also gives you an incentive to charm only high end creatures (why charm a level 3 spider when you can charm a level 10 dragon for a 7% penalty?)

I would imagine higher levels of spells make the level difference between casteer and creature "hurt" less allowing you to charm mobs with higher level than yours. Imo two factors should be balanced: the base probability which would be the maximal success chance of your spell and a multplier so that only players who have invested in the charm spell can effectivly charm creatures above their level.

In formulas, a level one spell would be for example 50-Max(difference of levels)*10, 0) and a last spell 100-Max(difference of levels)*1, 0). Early game you can only enroll cannon fodder for your army, late game, if you have invested in charm spell, you can charm top notch dragons that are stronger than you are.

ALso i imagine all charm spells should come with a cetain probability of seeing the creature break loose and wreaking havok in your army -)

Hmm. It is not fun if you cast a powerful charm spell, and it does nothing wasting the spell. It is overpowered if you can too easily charm powerful creatures. Why not make the charm result non-binary?

If the charm is strong compared to the target it works permanently. If it is weaker, the charm works temporarily. If it is pathetic, it fails. The temporary duration could scale smoothly, making it not an all or nothing effect. If the chance of complete failure is high, even a very successful roll should result in a few turns of the target being charmed. If the chance of permanent charming is very high, even the worst case scenario should allow you to charm the target for a dozen turns. By balancing the spell this way, it can be balanced to be non-overpowered, without feeling weak due to having it do nothing a lot.

Next, it appears that with charm level, you mean how strong this particular charm spell is. That is, there are multiple charm spells. If that is the case, that sounds like a bad idea. Having multiple spells with the same effect makes individual spells less unique. Instead, allow the caster to choose how much power to invest in the spell, like you can in Master of magic with spells such as disjunction.

Furthermore, the idea of using the caster's level directly seems odd. While level should influence the casting skill, it should not be only thing to do so. Making items for example, should be able to help. But since such things are not yet implemented, using level should do for now. It is something that I think should change prior to release though. The target's magic/mental resistance should also not be solely depend on its level. But for now, that too is acceptable.

So how about the following formula:

(STRENGTH + 5 * (CASTER LVL - TARGET LVL) + D30) / 5 = Duration

If Duration exceeds 15, effect is permanent instead.

With D30 representing a random integer with an equal chance of being any number between 1 and 30, or the effect of simulated 30 sided die, and the duration being in turns. Or something like this formula, depending on the desired random factor and influence of Level.

I scoff you 3D-obssessed deck junkies, but you get the point back for good onomatopoeia. Bring on the plooping terrain icons, and sing praises to the Horse That Made the World.

Re the first run at charm spells, I also think that some entities should be difficult or impossible to charm no matter how powerful a spell-caster is. And I have an uncomfortable twinge from my inner D&Der who wants separate spells for charming character types vs. monster types. That would be one way to work around the no-free-will=no-way-to-charm problem Cerevox mentioned.

The Level thing also seems wrong because it is too abstract. If the formula needs a stat, it should be something like Will, Wisdom, or Intelligence. Otherwise it seems likely that the game will end up treating things like young dragons and troll-kings as equally susceptible to charms, which would seem very wrong.

Making the results a scale of some sort rather than a binary success/failure also seems both logical and more fun.

Charming, just charming..... I agree that the spell math system is a bit oversimplified as is... I'd like to see maybe a few other potential effects.. such as if the unit is stronger than you a failed charm spell could potentially turn back on the user and charming him, or that a unit trying to resist charm spells would suffer mental/physical damage if it and/or the channeler is strong enough... or a possible multi-turn mind battle a bit like Denethor and Sauron...

Charm is a kind of spell that makes sense to have periodic checks on. Charm does not imply Dominate, so Charm is more of a suggestive spell rather than a puppeteer spell.

To that end, the effectiveness of Charm should in part depend on what you suggest the unit does. Movement is easy. Self-defense is easy. Attacking is harder. Attacking a related species (troll attacking another troll) is very difficult.

The strength of the spell and the level/stats of the caster would determine the chances of the charmed unit obeying your suggestion, each time an order is made (this way a multi-turn movement order doesn't need to be re-evaluated each turn).

Now if you were to put an actual Dominate spell, that really is just a one time cast to break the creature's mind and if successful lasts until the creature dies.

A couple interesting mechanics to consider:

1) As mentioned, creature 'will' resists. A strong-willed creature (sentient) should be tougher to charm/dominate than a critter (spider).

2) Maintained spells. You'd have to maintain your hold on the target creature, costing x points of mana regeneration (similar to the spell system in Guild Wars, where each enchantment you maintain slows your energy regeneration). This would work well for Charm/Dominate types of spells.

In every single thread about gamemechanics there's always talk about logic and sense just like it mattered....

You (developers) want the most control to make the game as good as possible so a willpower attribute would be useful.

I also echo what Netriak said about lvls of control instead of success or failure.

How does charm relate to animals that can be tamed or used as a mount? If I find a critter A for instance, can I keep it away from the battle and start up a stable eventually (several years and generations later) overcoming the need to domnate the animal?

I just assumed that probability determined the probability of complete charm and that the respective variations of control would be present, too. Damn. *slaps forehead* naughty brain, naughty! *slaps forehead again* stop assuming brother, get a hold of yourself.

*crawls into corner of the room, rolling back and fourth in feeble position*

Using the raw level difference as the percentage imposes far too minor a penalty for charming higher level monsters. At the very least there should be a per turn upkeep, and I think the percentage needs to go down at a superlinear rate of level difference. It would also help give the spell some flavor if different creature types had different susceptibilities to it, apart from the effect due to the level.

You really surprised about that? My (failed) joke in the other thread about releasing the 3D engine sooner was based on that. In 3D surely will look stunning and all that but in the cloth map... well, you could try to have some kind of custom animation for the cloth map. Or some kind of window/popup with a image of what the spell is supposedly doing? (a volcano raising, earth shattering...) The window would stay only as long as the spell is being cast and accompanied with some kind of little effect in the map.

In any case, people that play in the cloth map do it for functionality, right? Surely no reason to complain that you don't get fancy things that depend purely of 3D thingies.

Charm, charm, charm... What's up with Domination?

I suggested elsewhere on numerous occasions that every unit in the game have attribute statistics much like those an RPG-Sovereign would have, and at least one of these attributes (which I called Charisma so far) also reflected Mental Magic resistance. I would give the Charm spell the flag: "Is_Mental_Magic", and modifiers such as mental magic resistance would help deflect this. The game would go through a series of checks:

First, it checks if the target has a mind. (Undead, for example, will not have the flag "Is_Mindowning")

Then, it checks for target strength, based upon Level, as you suggested.

Then, it checks for mental resistance and/or susceptibility. Charisma (or whatever you want to call it) scores above base 10 yield +1 resistance point per point of charisma until 20, then +2 per point until 30, then +3 per point until 40.

Modifiers for the caster's ability to penetrate the resistance can be based on Level and Willpower, etc.

A similar system would be implementable for other types of spells (e.g. Constitution-based for poison-type spells, etc.)

I got your joke winter.

They need a text description on the cloth map btw. From an eye witness.

"Your high majesty of all lords sire, when you cast your oh so mighty spell, this here farmer was near by (and slightly singed by the experince)!"

"Aye me looiard! I twas thar! I saw it wit me own two eyes! A greeat boom of thunder followed by a tremedus roaring the likes of which I 'ad never once heerd before my sire! Then it happen, just like that it was. The icon for that plain turned right into a mountain it did. 'Well I right can't farm that' I said to the wife and she said 'Well you can't farm for the love of all thats blue anyway!'. T'at ungrateful sow of a woman. I tell you my sire, one o' these days she'll feel it right good she will! Then she wont be complainin 'bout me 'lack of purpose' for the 'life in me lungs'. Umm. What was I here for again? Spells? Oh yes sire! I was telling you how your amazing spell ruined ma farmland. Yee git... sire."

I think that charming monsters should have a short duration related to the strength of the spell, I'm assuming that the strength of a spell is related to it's mana costs so a higher strength spell will cost more mana.

Another option is to make charmed monsters a reasource drain on your ecconomy, they will require food and other things, that resource drain could be reduced with reaserch and special buildings.

For example if you charmed a wolf, you will get the option to reaserch "tame wolf" and unlock wolf kennels, higher level of reaserch will eventualy alow you to recruit wolfs like any other unit. This reaserch option should only pop up after you charmed X number of wolves.

That way you will also be able to get gaint spiders mounts, Gaint siege breakers, bear cavalry etc etc.

Warder

I think the different charm spells should work on different kinds of creatures.  Taking control of a giant spider has different balancing implications from stealing a unit of enemy soldiers.

A soldier with steel plate armour and a peasant are both just humans serving their liege; the only difference in charming them would be that the soldier might have anti-charm training and/or equipment, so such a spell's power is very variable.

A Charm Monster spell however, relies on the resistance stat of the monster, and is therefore easier to balance.

And, as the others pointed out, breeding animals is viable and breeding monsters might be plausible, but breeding enemy soldiers makes no sense at all.

Also, soldiers come in units, but monsters don't (AFAIK).  If you only charm half of a unit, things could get messy.

In Master of Magic, spells that could take control of a unit did work on a spell power vs. target resistance basis, but there were only a small variety of such spells.  I think the reason why it didn't feel useless might have something to do with the immediacy of the effect of the spell.  You could only do it during tactical combat, so it was always risky.  To be worth doing, the target must be dangerous, so you try not to harm it, but then, if your spell fails, you lost a lot of mana for nothing and sit with a dangerous unharmed enemy unit in close range.  And it of course worked much easier on some units than others, so choosing your target wasn't always easy.  A weaker similar spell was Confuse, which worked reasonably easily, but the effect was random every turn.  Sometimes the unit serves the enemy, sometimes you, sometimes it did nothing and sometimes it moved randomly.  The more predictable and powerful spell only worked on summoned creatures.  And I think there was a black magic spell which worked on normal units, but dropped their defence to 0 and doubled their attack strength.

So, for the beta, I think simple spells work well, but for the full game I think more complicated spells make the choices harder. (a.k.a. more interesting)

I absolutely agree...magic resistance must be very important in this case. So if a creature is highly resistant to magic, it should be close to impossible to charm it.

It think it will be more fun if the charm spell NEVER fails.  If you attempt to charm a more powerful monster, the duration of the charm decreases.   (I also agree that some statistics like Wisdom/magic resistance, or whether a unit is of the type of undead, is relevant to this Duration calcuation)

Focusing on the fun again, there should be a distinction btn Charm & Dominate.  Dominating a unit will allow you keeping the unit after the combat finishes.  How many units and how long the duration of the domination will be similar to the factors affecting charming.

A soveregin should be given pre-game option to specilize, whether he can be a great charmer or dominator (using a Charmer Modifier).   While It is inherently harder to charm higher end units, but when your sovereign is a Charmer, this is not that hard.

Using the OP as an rough example, the Sovereign can charm a level 8 troll for [93 / 8 * Wisdom Resistance of the Troll * Sov's Charmer Modifier] turns in tactical combat.

That made me laugh out loud, while I am at school in a computer room. Everybody stared at me. :P

Anyway, I think some sort of upkeep maybe should be in order. That way you should pick carefully who you want to charm and soft-caps the number of creatures that you can charm. Charming should not become a major way to get raise a large army quickly imo, it should be just an options that you have in order to supplement your army should the need arise. Maybe you guys designed it otherwise, so then by all means go with that.

MoM had a system where you could summon monsters if I am not mistaken. This did cost upkeep in mana. It was a good way to get some punchingbag for your army while the real units took out the enemies, or to defend yourself for a few turns. Summoning was not a good way to build an army. Imho that will be the way to go for elemental too. It should be a viable alternative, not the main way.

Elemental: It's Fun to Charm Stuff...

On the other hand, this has given spells such as 'Charm Monster' a chance to prove their worth. Using magic to build an arachnid and troll army has proven quite enjoyable...an instant gratification spell that could also turn the tide of future battles.

 

wow ... some genius found out after merely 10 years why Pokemon became a billion dollar franchise.

You all probably thought it was because of the life-like realistic bestiary.