Page 1 of 1

proposal to the spell curse

Posted: 2012-11-15
by JobinStabb
I was wondering if we could think about changing the spell curse to a any use spell. it is not a overpowering spell does noy have Aoe and is not a instant kill.

Re: proposal to the spell curse

Posted: 2012-11-15
by Karma
For all intents and purposes, it is an insta-kill (light to every limb) that goes right through shields and armor. I'm not weighing in on this one way or the other right now, but you need to grasp just how potent curse really is. Every curse spellball is basically an arrow of piercing.

Re: proposal to the spell curse

Posted: 2012-11-15
by Amazing_Iltztafein
Clerics have enough already on battle days.

I would be more for this if someone wanted to change curse to do something else, like say, destroy all armor. I'm surprised we don't have a spell that does that, to be honest.

But I don't think most clerics would like that change, so I'm not going to actually propose it. But if anybody likes that idea, there is no reason some class shouldn't have that spell.

Re: proposal to the spell curse

Posted: 2012-11-15
by Karma
Keep in mind that if the arrow hits a limb you only lose that limb, but if curse hits you anywhere, including the head/face, you're down.

Re: proposal to the spell curse

Posted: 2012-11-16
by DrSquirrel
.......but curse only hits one person, is 250 words at max, and also not even nearly as dumb and dangerous a fire ball . If used in the right hands on the right person, same goes for curse, but I bet if somebody like you karma saw it you could dodge it easier than a fireball. On the hand clerics have a strong field preciseness with tower and full plate and flail. I will say it though curse is fun, but in a two team unless you read fast you are not getting it off. I see no problem with it being used on a regular day. Other than Bellum we normally do what? Two teams. I see no problem with it coming out, it might add more fun to two teams even make fighters use first and clerics or druids use cure serious.

On a personal note give a dagger as a cleric and I will give up curse

Re: proposal to the spell curse

Posted: 2012-11-16
by DrSquirrel
Karma wrote:For all intents and purposes, it is an insta-kill (light to every limb) that goes right through shields and armor. I'm not weighing in on this one way or the other right now, but you need to grasp just how potent curse really is. Every curse spellball is basically an arrow of piercing.


btw no where does the rule book say a light to every limb is a kill, you just become a talking potato

Re: proposal to the spell curse

Posted: 2012-11-16
by Ogre Solaris
What he means is you're essentially useless in that state. You can't walk or swing a weapon or cast a spell, you might as well be dead.

I wouldn't be opposed to toning it down as long as you shorten it or something. WoH is mostly useless because a shield blocks that, so I wouldn't want to see curse be that toned down, but maybe destroy your legs and not your arms or something. I don't know, it would warrant discussion. I know people use curse to capture people, that would change if it lost power. I've personally used it in combat mostly but have also used it on a freshly resurrected person so we could hold them for questioning. It's a good spell for that so it serves a purpose.

Back to the OP, I never saw a problem giving us curse at day events because it's too long to just get to throw a curse ball. It might prompt people to actually use healing spells on others which I don't see very often, but I know I'm not getting that spell off before someone shield bashes me to the ground, it's too long, so it wouldn't make much difference if we got it or not.

Re: proposal to the spell curse

Posted: 2012-11-16
by fingers630
DrSquirrel wrote:.......but curse only hits one person, is 250 words at max, and also not even nearly as dumb and dangerous a fire ball .



LOL and a guy ignoring 2 hits with an 18" shield is not as dumb and dangerous as a dude in full plate with a shield as big as a car door hitting you in the head. What is the point of this comment?

btw, Ice Storm is just as much of an "insta kill" as curse, and takes a lot less time to cast.

Re: proposal to the spell curse

Posted: 2012-11-16
by Lord Valfryn
Until the cleric class gives up the plate and tower (or flail), they will get nothing from me. Nothing!

Mod, please move to prop discussion.

Re: proposal to the spell curse

Posted: 2012-11-16
by fingers630
Nothing wrong with flails, rest of clerics weapons are trash. Shield size should be 36 inch and equivalent of ar2 armor (id be fine with grandfathering plate with appropriate armband and "counts as" scale too. since people shouldnt be metagaming armbands and players are to call their own hits, it shouldnt be an issue)

Re: proposal to the spell curse

Posted: 2012-11-18
by Kai Firebrand
You cannot just straight compare one spell from a class to another; curse vs fireball is very bad argument. Classes are a combination of all their class spells and abilities.

Re: proposal to the spell curse

Posted: 2012-11-19
by HRH Malkin
So you want a class to : have the best Armor in the game, have access to the the only head leagal weapon in the game, be the only class that can raise dead characters back to life, have all the fastest healing spells, be the only class that can permanently prevent characters from coming back (ala last rites), AND NOW have a spell that is equal in capacity to the best combat spell in the game: because the their best combat spell isn't AOE...it only penetrates shields and makes the person a paraplegic... am I getting this right?

-Malkin

Re: proposal to the spell curse

Posted: 2012-11-19
by Kobalos
HRH Malkin wrote:... am I getting this right?


I think that's about it. I don't see it getting far, though. Jobin was prolly just pitching the idea out there, and I think he has his feedback--I noticed he hasn't submitted a formal proposal yet.

Re: proposal to the spell curse

Posted: 2012-11-19
by fingers630
Personally I always thought curse should destroy all weapons, armor and shield on an individual instead of harming them.

Re: proposal to the spell curse

Posted: 2012-11-19
by Zodiac89
If you limited such a spell to affect only chain and plate, maybe left out their weapon (or limit it to the one they're currently wielding, and not every weapon strapped to their body), someone like a Druid could use it, call it "Return to Nature" or something like that. Or give it to a Mage, and call it something like "Disintegrate" if there is not already a spell of that name.

Re: proposal to the spell curse

Posted: 2012-11-30
by PadreCaedes
Turn Undead and Curse are spells I've used so rarely in almost a decade that it's laughable. Would I personally throw curse more if it were a battle spell? Probably not, but then again we'll probably never know unless someone makes a compelling argument. Won't be me. I don't think we need the boost.

Re: proposal to the spell curse

Posted: 2012-11-30
by Inox
I'd rather see Clerics lose attack spells (Curse & Word of Holding) & gain the use of sacrificial Daggers.

Re: proposal to the spell curse

Posted: 2012-12-01
by Artex
Please just leave clerics alone. I don't want to see another perfectly fine class being * up because new people can't afford plate.

Re: proposal to the spell curse

Posted: 2012-12-02
by Fiyero
I feel like this was troll proposal