New spell

[LabRat]

I was idling on IP on the wicked bad PK server (pay $5 and join today!) thinking about the whole summoning stones debate.

 

From the left side of nowhere 2 words popped into my (admittedly overpopulated) head:

Steal Summoned.

 

Steal summoned: Claim ownership of a summoned creature, bending it to your will not the original summoner.

 

The spell should be moderately high level magic, but shouldn't require a massive amount of ingredients as the monster is already in this plane of existence.

 

A block could be put on the summoned creature being stolen if you have cast (and are still under the influence of) magic immunity that could enrage the creature, giving it say a 20% a/d modifier bonus for the life of the magic immunity spell.

 

Comments?

[Blodoks]

If someone steal Agneum what do you say?

[LabRat]

EEEP that's the last time I say her password in local

[Blodoks]

Is it a reply?

I don't understand why someone must to take advantage of the work of other players with a "moderatly high level magic". I summoned costantly for 3 years and only from few months I have the advantage of 1 monster

vs every player who start the game now (after 14 hours is possible to buy a giant stone)

[Aislinn]

How about if this would just apply to creatures from summoning stones?

 

As a slowly up and coming summoner, I understand now how and why summoners are attached to their summoned creatures. It's hard work and takes a lot of patience and gc and effort to get anywhere, with little reward. I myself now am not pleased if somebody comes along and kills off my summons without asking or permission, and I would not like somebody coming along and stealing one either.

[SL7yz0r]

How about if this would just apply to creatures from summoning stones?

 

As a slowly up and coming summoner, I understand now how and why summoners are attached to their summoned creatures. It's hard work and takes a lot of patience and gc and effort to get anywhere, with little reward. I myself now am not pleased if somebody comes along and kills off my summons without asking or permission, and I would not like somebody coming along and stealing one either.

Good idea!

[neildog]

Actually I really like the original idea but it should be based on a high magic level and a moderate summon level. Don't think there is any reason why a spell can't be based on a combo of skills.

 

I think that would be much more fair.

Maybe

magic 48+

summon 38+

random and can be tweaked but you get the idea...

[Blodoks]

I don't agree about summoning stones too, now.

Edited January 7, 2008 by Blodoks

[LabRat]

Now the penalty: a thief must to be pkable for an EL day, 6 hours to start from a succesful cast

My penalty was

A block could be put on the summoned creature being stolen if you have cast (and are still under the influence of) magic immunity that could enrage the creature, giving it say a 20% a/d modifier bonus for the life of the magic immunity spell.

While an enraged rabbit wouldn't cause too much grief, an enraged giant sure would.

[Usl]

Steal summoned: Claim ownership of a summoned creature, bending it to your will not the original summoner.

 

This spell had already been proposed:

For example: a spell for creating a whirlwind protecting from arrows (by adding a random factor to their course, using air and magic essence); a spell for revealing hidden landmines (earth and magic essence); a high-level spell for "charming" another player summons and assuming control of them (effect based on your charm and magic level, and opponents' charm and summon level, using life and death essence or maybe even an ELE); a spell for paralizing/freezing/slowing down another player for three turns, or maybe just affecting the opponent's pet... possibilities are endless, and the combinations of sigils almost inexhaustible...

I am a dedicated un-summoner, so my judgement might be biased, but I still think the spell should be an attempt at stealing a creature, and that a test based on summon level/charm of the original owner vs. magic level/charm of the mage should be made. This would characterize charm as *the* attribute linking summoners to their creatures.

And probably, the mage should have a sufficient animal nexus to get control of the creature - otherwise, even after a successfull roll, the creature could go "wild", or maybe just dissolve.

 

As for ingredients, I think an attempt at stealing a dragon should take at the very minimum an ELE and/or an EME: remember it costs 6 EFE, 5 ELE, 1 mixture of power and 10 serpent stones to summon one of these babies... for smaller creatures, a simpler spell using only simple essences should suffice.

Edited January 6, 2008 by Usl

[freeone3000]

I agree in that a charm-based approach would discourage the use of summoning stones (such as giants) by non-summoners. A summoner would be able to pop off a spell and almost certainly grab the creature.

 

However, I think the requirement of an enriched essence for a chance at a steal would be prohibitively expensive.

One of the possible fixes would to be using thirty or fourty regular magic essences and life essences instead of an EME or an ELE. This would decrease the price, but not by much, and would greatly increase the EMU requirement of the spell.

The other possible fix would be the "Greater" Steal Summoned be perfectly successful (though not irreversable!). Last I checked, there were no summon stones for dragons, meaning that it would be summoner versus summoner, and a Greater Steal Summoned war would be great for poor alchemists (or at least a brick or two for ent's castle).

Edited January 6, 2008 by freeone3000

[Fedora]

I think the problem with summoning cant be resolved with a spell. Magic has been fixed by linking the power of spells to lvl and rationality allowing the development of a mage class.

 

The same thing should happen for summoning, linking the max number and power of creature to summoning lvl and charm. The 14 hours old player with 0 summoning and 4 charm clicking on the stone, will find at least his 25kgc blowed away or, if you are evil enough, an upset giant bashing is newbish head...

 

Why not have something like summon points (sp)? sp=2*summoning+charm; everytime you summon (by any means) you spend some of those points depending on the recommended level of the pet. A giant needs 55 summoning...only with maxed out charm and a few lvls you can do it if you are not a dedicated summoner.

Moreover low lvl stones usage will be almost untouched (every fighter will have some charm after the cap).

 

Many other changes would be nice too...i dont get why Blodoks giants are as powerful as mine when he is 30 lvls over me (years of gameplay). Strenght (which today is only crit damage/to hit afaik) should depend on lvl too (and maybe give some def to pets).

 

Last, and then i'll shut up, hp loss should be removed too. Afaik it was introduced to limit the lifespan of pets...simply make pets disappear after an interval of time depending on charm/summoning/power of creature

 

Then a new class, the Summoner, will arise from the gypsum dust where it lies now

 

 

(oh, and in this contest a steal summon spell could be nice...provided you have enough sp to steal my pet...)

Edited January 6, 2008 by Fedora

[SL7yz0r]

Steal summoned: Claim ownership of a summoned creature, bending it to your will not the original summoner.

 

This spell had already been proposed:

For example: a spell for creating a whirlwind protecting from arrows (by adding a random factor to their course, using air and magic essence); a spell for revealing hidden landmines (earth and magic essence); a high-level spell for "charming" another player summons and assuming control of them (effect based on your charm and magic level, and opponents' charm and summon level, using life and death essence or maybe even an ELE); a spell for paralizing/freezing/slowing down another player for three turns, or maybe just affecting the opponent's pet... possibilities are endless, and the combinations of sigils almost inexhaustible...

I am a dedicated un-summoner, so my judgement might be biased, but I still think the spell should be an attempt at stealing a creature, and that a test based on summon level/charm of the original owner vs. magic level/charm of the mage should be made. This would characterize charm as *the* attribute linking summoners to their creatures.

And probably, the mage should have a sufficient animal nexus to get control of the creature - otherwise, even after a successfull roll, the creature could go "wild", or maybe just dissolve.

 

As for ingredients, I think an attempt at stealing a dragon should take at the very minimum an ELE and/or an EME: remember it costs 6 EFE, 5 ELE, 1 mixture of power and 10 serpent stones to summon one of these babies... for smaller creatures, a simpler spell using only simple essences should suffice.

These are good idears. listen to usl.

[Rehdon]

I agree with Fedora, summoning would surely benefit from the same level of attention that's been granted to magic. The proposed spell, in any case, would be problematic because to make it fair to summoners it should require both high summoning/magic levels and, as Usl suggested, high level ingredients comparable to those needed for the corresponding summon. In short, a very unlikely spell (although the idea is interesting).

 

Rehdon

[ville-v]

Is it a reply?

I don't understand why someone must to take advantage of the work of other players with a "moderatly high level magic". I summoned costantly for 3 years and only from few months I have the advantage of 1 monster

vs every player who start the game now (after 14 hours is possible to buy a giant stone)

Base the spell to summoning and magic level like "bones to gold", and compare summoning levels of both to get the percentage.

[DogBreath]

Maybe instead of 'steal' summoned, this could be dispell summoned.

 

What I'm suggesting would be that 'no one' has ownership of the summon after a sucessful cast of this. This would make it quite an issue for both players then, not giving a 'huge' advantage to either... and potenially ending up with both of them dead. I know it would certainly make you wonder if using the spell (dispell) was a good choice, or even if a summon was a good choice. It would also make using a 'stone' with a creature out of your range a potentially deadly decision.

 

Just my slant on this

[Aislinn]

What I'm suggesting would be that 'no one' has ownership of the summon after a sucessful cast of this.

Why would a summoner even bother then? Have you looked at what is needed to cast anything useful? Summoning is a very hard skill to level, the experience amounts gained per summoned creature are miniscule and the cost incredibly high, especially considering that you can't make a profit with summoning (not counting stones, but creatures) until you get to a very high level and then the cost and required items are outrageous per creature. Even the stones are tedius to make.

 

I can't see that any of these suggestions and ideas will help summoning at all, rather will make this skill even more obsolete.

[DogBreath]

What I'm suggesting would be that 'no one' has ownership of the summon after a sucessful cast of this.

Why would a summoner even bother then? Have you looked at what is needed to cast anything useful? Summoning is a very hard skill to level, the experience amounts gained per summoned creature are miniscule and the cost incredibly high, especially considering that you can't make a profit with summoning (not counting stones, but creatures) until you get to a very high level and then the cost and required items are outrageous per creature. Even the stones are tedius to make.

 

I can't see that any of these suggestions and ideas will help summoning at all, rather will make this skill even more obsolete.

Perhaps I misunderstood the reason for this suggestion. I thought it was a way to defend against summoning (or more specifially purchased summoning stones?).

 

I would assume that some spell like this would be high level, so unless the summoner ran into a high level 'mage' type, they would surely still benefit from summoning. Yes, I'm quite aware of the requirements for summoning, I'm not trying to disrupt their abilities, just answering this suggestion.

[Wizzy]

What I'm suggesting would be that 'no one' has ownership of the summon after a sucessful cast of this.

Why would a summoner even bother then? Have you looked at what is needed to cast anything useful? Summoning is a very hard skill to level, the experience amounts gained per summoned creature are miniscule and the cost incredibly high, especially considering that you can't make a profit with summoning (not counting stones, but creatures) until you get to a very high level and then the cost and required items are outrageous per creature. Even the stones are tedius to make.

 

I can't see that any of these suggestions and ideas will help summoning at all, rather will make this skill even more obsolete.

 

I agree to burn up 10-15K in Enriched essences and have some one steal it right away would be not much fun. Though would be intresting to see with summon stones...Someone uses giant stone on ebul charming summoner, and the giant decides to switch sides ^^

[DogBreath]

<snip...>

I agree to burn up 10-15K in Enriched essences and have some one steal it right away would be not much fun. Though would be intresting to see with summon stones...Someone uses giant stone on ebul charming summoner, and the giant decides to switch sides ^^

Assuming someone made the stones, should the be punished the same as someone who purchased the stones? Is there a way to tell the difference? Is there a way to tell they didn't summon it, instead of using a stone? I'm not sure it's possible to punish the 'stone' user versus the summoner... And, if I had invested in this 'pet' I'd rather see it turned neutral than become someone else's pet, that's for sure. Talk about punishing, having the investement become someone else's freebie?

 

EDIT: also, I'd assume that the summoner's stats (charm, specifically) would affect this type of spell, so someone using a stone with no charm would more easily 'lose' their pet than someone who actually knows how to control summoned pets (whether it came from a stone or not...)

Edited January 7, 2008 by DogBreath

[draavell]

It seems that this would only be used in PK situations, limited to PK areas/server. So there would be no need to worry about your summons in normal operations of them, summoning for exp. or helping kill monsters. Any chance to defend against a summoner in PK would be nice, whether its charmed, dispelled, or just highly damaged, just as magic if defendable with equipment and magic levels of caster vs. defender.

Edited January 7, 2008 by draavell

[Aislinn]

And, if I had invested in this 'pet' I'd rather see it turned neutral than become someone else's pet, that's for sure. Talk about punishing, having the investement become someone else's freebie?

I think you will find if those are the only two options, nobody will invest in these "pets" at all.

 

The only way anything like this could possibly work is if it was against ONLY summoning stones. Otherwise the skill takes a HUGE leap backwards.

[DogBreath]

And, if I had invested in this 'pet' I'd rather see it turned neutral than become someone else's pet, that's for sure. Talk about punishing, having the investement become someone else's freebie?

I think you will find if those are the only two options, nobody will invest in these "pets" at all.

 

The only way anything like this could possibly work is if it was against ONLY summoning stones. Otherwise the skill takes a HUGE leap backwards.

I can see your point here. Perhaps if charm was part of this spell (both the casters and the pet owner's) then it would more than likely affect someone using a stone who wasn't nearly qualified to use it and not affect the true summoner nearly as much using a stone or a summoned pet...

[Aislinn]

It seems that this would only be used in PK situations, limited to PK areas/server. So there would be no need to worry about your summons in normal operations of them, summoning for exp. or helping kill monsters.

I'm not sure what you think "normal operations" would be. Why do we level in the first place? Just to summon a giant in votd and have it follow us around until it dies? To finally be able to summon these creatures just so somebody can steal it away from us? Again, why bother? Summoning will go right back to being a skill with no purpose for the wealthy bored folks.

[LabRat]

Does Smite Summoned only work on [edit]stone summoned[/edit] creatures?

Edited January 7, 2008 by LabRat