Greetings, glorious adventurers! If you're joining in our Alpha One spot testing, please follow the steps here to see all the latest test info on our forums and Discord!
Options
Summons should last how long?
ArchivedUser
Guest
Should a summoners minion last until killed or should it be on a timer? Or a bit of both?
0
Comments
How effective you are depends on how much you specced into regen for that associated resource pool.
Its not a transient effect or a burst at the end of the day. Its an ongoing channel. but it really depends if the summoned creatures cant be repaired and healed or if they can be repaired and healed.
If they cant be repaired and healed then I have no objection to a cost per cast.
Would you let a summoner have simultaneous summons being channelled at once?
Example:
Permanent summons are there until killed, dismissed, or you log off.
Temporary obviously on some timer like # of rounds in D&D
The length of the timer would depend on the class and the skill level.
If the concept behind it was more like D&D, they should be forced to make checks (maybe level or stat dependent) to gain control of the thing summoned - and even still, it shouldn't be a permanent thing.
Unless indefinite servitude is a thing (i.e. slaves.)
Forming contracts might be a way around it, but they are so varied in form, I imagine that could be wildly abused.
I also want summoners to be able to summon people or party members. If that system is included, I would say that dictates a mixed bag. Summoning a party member should be permanent... but summoning an enemy somehow should be temporary, or able to be resisted and fought.
For me there is no difference between summons and AoE or Burst accept its delayed and executed by a 3rd party.
So a single target summoner would summon one large minion with maximum damage vs an AoE summoner that would call 10 small minions with 10% damage and lifespan each. The summoned creatures net effect are no different, only how it is delivered. Play-style change rather than power creep. [You could sacrifice range for size and quantity too as another variable]
Of course, a more powerful summoner would be able to summon a more powerful creature and more powerful groups of minions and maybe even more minions to reflect increased AoE targets with progression, or even range, but the general rule still holds.
It gets tricky with a burst or sustain summoner. Should you have burst summoner that can summon something really powerful but rarely or a sustain summoner that can summon something weaker but much more often. As long as they put out the same DPS/MPS/HPS...I guess it doesnt really matter. They are just alternate playstyles with no net advantage (except possibly situational).
So even a summoner can be burst, sustain, single target or AoE focused and perhaps spec into their preferred style. That enables the option to use the right summoner for the right job and increase Ashes Niche build variety further.
By biassing between pool size 'or' regen, you will either have a bigger pool of energy to summon a bigger creature but with low regen and thus low reoccurence......or summon a smaller creature with the smaller pool, but be able to sustain them much longer with better regen and have increased reoccurrence.
That is how I would go about it anyway. Which may or may not keep everyone happy.
Id also like any life force the player has shared between his minions so you dont have to effectively kill the same player twice by burning through an extra free dose of minion health.
However I think it makes sense that secondary class should influence this.
I liked a lot of what you stated in your post. But, I think we're also overlooking how summoner mechanics work in PvP, seeing as how Ashes is a PvX game, blending PvE/PvP side by side.
In PvP situations, in my experience, when a opposing player has to choose between a summoner, or his/her summons, the summoner will be the chosen target 99% of the time, while the summons is largely ignored, outside of CC'ing it, if possible. That's usually because the bulk of the damage comes from the summoner, while the summons just provides extra dps. Kill the summoner, and you kill the main source of dps, and you kill the pesky summons. Easy peasy. I would hate to see this be the norm is Ashes, so what kind of mechanic could be implemented to make the choice between targets more challenging?
One way would be to equip every summon with a hard taunt that hard switches an attacker from the summoner, to the summons, while also making the summoner "un-targetable" for a set amount of time.
Another way would be to look at the dps output of both the summoner, and summons. In my opinion, the summons has to be a huge enough threat, dps-wise, to make it a preferred target over the summoner, in this scenario. But, to balance this, the more powerful the summons, the more it costs to maintain, thus, lessening the dps of the summoner. Conversely, less powerful summons can possibly provide various buffs, resulting in more dps from the summoner. Also, this doesn't take into account how the secondary class could affect the relationship/playstyle/mechanics between summoner, and summons.
Something along these lines, just brainstorming.
If mage protection spells were also permanent until absorbing so much damage, or tank abilities and so on...
I don't think just one class should have access to 'permanents.'
I have never seen anything wrong with a timer either. Sure, sometimes it's inconvenient but that is true for all classes at some point or another.
1. Hard taunt and summoner Immunity ? hhhm. I think that can only fairly work if the summoner is disabled while the summons are up. You become an obelisk in a way. If your targetted adversary dies before your summons does, then the summons are recalled and you go back to normal. Like a self induced trance state if you will. As your summons share your life force....if they die... you die.
2. The distributed DPS/MPS/HPS and health option can also work around the problem in a way, as you cant be killed....more unconscious. It wont be until all the summons are also killed that all your life force is expended. As you wont be the only one doing serious damage, your odds of survival still remain good, as your damage potential remains as long as most of the summons are up.
3. The other option is to have channelled/shared health. Attacking any summons lowers the health of all summons, but the pool and regen (resource management) remains under control of the player. That completely removes the hitting player or summon problem because the choice has no meaning any more. They are a unit rather than separate entities.
The main problem with the summoner is you are relying on the AI of the summons to do the damage/mitigation/healing. BUT...if you could take over control of a summons if your main body was killed downed like monster tokens, you could replace the AI with personal control, although it would be limited to the skill set the type of summons possesses. That would get rather complex coding wise though. I could envisage it causing problems with many summoners fighting in a large scale battle.
So. Downing the player removes control (bad). Player as an obelisk removes control (bad). Giving player AI control over the summons creates enormous complexity (bad) although cool. That only really leaves the shared health option in my eyes with distributed MPS/DPS/HPS.
Everyone is useful.
Even decoys can waste lots of an enemies time.
Time is the greatest weapon and shield in any war.