Just throwing this concept out here

[UninspiredName]

I agree, we don't have enough dual-path magic. Earth seems to be the worst offender, at the moment.

[Cor]

Here Here! More cross path spells! In fact I would like to see more spells period. Even cooler, spells that require 3,4 and 5 paths. [img]/threads/images/Graemlins/Lightning.gif[/img] [img]/threads/images/Graemlins/Campfire.gif[/img] [img]/threads/images/Graemlins/icon49.gif[/img] [img]/threads/images/Graemlins/icon01.gif[/img] !

[Endoperez]

Cor said:
Here Here! More cross path spells! In fact I would like to see more spells period. Even cooler, spells that require 3,4 and 5 paths. [img]/threads/images/Graemlins/Lightning.gif[/img] [img]/threads/images/Graemlins/Campfire.gif[/img] [img]/threads/images/Graemlins/icon49.gif[/img] [img]/threads/images/Graemlins/icon01.gif[/img] !

3, 4, 5-path spells are currently impossible. Spells with Holy requirement are possible, even as rituals (e.g. S3H1). As I said earlier, I like multipath.

[HoneyBadger]

Agrajag, the point would be to open up new areas for new spells. Yes, the magic system we currently have works fine, but that doesn't mean that it can't be improved, and one way to improve it is to expand it in relatively logical ways. One of the purposes of the designers of Dom3 was to create a game that had many, many options. 8 magical paths is fine, for now, but it's a pretty low number for a game which features 1600+ different types of units and prides itself on being "the end-all be-all epic turn based strategy of all time". I agree that I wouldn't want magical paths that had no purpose or point, I just feel that more can and should be done in this area. As far as multi-path spells, it's a good idea, and I have no problems with it, but I think it's kind of silly to start adding death/astral/earth/nature/fire/blood spells for again no real reason. Why not just call that "type" of magic by a different name? It doesn't have to be one of the ones I've come up with, but it's a more elegant solution, and probably easier to code in, from a programmer's perspective.

[UninspiredName]

You can have 'epic' and 'simple' and the same time. Though I will admit, whether it means more paths or not, more spells would be nice. Many, many more spells...

[HoneyBadger]

I agree, epic and simple are not mutually exclusive, but "epic" does atleast imply complexity. And I would also like more, many more, spells. One of the advantages of more paths would be more ways in which you could bless your troops. This would give you more options when building your pretender and strategy, which is one of my reasons for more paths.

[UninspiredName]

Time bless... Now there's an interesting thought...

[HoneyBadger]

Agrajag, "your idea", atleast the one you seem to be referencing, is the one the developers had, namely dual-path spells. Which is great, because that's already in the game, and you're right, it wouldn't be very much trouble to code in, because again it's already there in the game. Fully coded. If it is the point you're trying to make, then I thank you for the information, but I already figured that much out. I think it took me almost an hour of actually playing version 3.0, but I might have picked it up when I was paging through the manual. I've misplaced my manual though, so I can't confirm that for you at this time.
Now, if their are spells in the game that do at this time utilize/require more than two paths, then maybe I have missed them or just have not been paying attention, but I believe that currently-insofar as my limited knowledge extends-there are no spells which require 3+ areas of knowledge to make use of them. Am I right? Again, I don't know where my manual's gone to, I think it fell behind the little fridge next to my work computer, and their are too many wires back there for me to casually do a hunt with the barbeque tongs. I'll get to it one day when I have time and am not feeling particularly lazy.

If you are, however, referencing multi-path spells, "multi" in this case meaning 3 or 4 or 5, providing they're not in some secret level of the game, ala Mario Underworld, and depending on the type of language the developers write in (like most languages, it's one I'm not directly "hands-on" familiar with), and the way an individual programmer works, chances are that yes, it would be more difficult to add in spells which require more than two types of magic than it would be to just rename and/or add more than two types of magic. The reason for this is programs are like a house. They have four walls and a roof. The 1 or 2 types of magic per spell is like one of the walls. It's a major, "load-bearing" concept that the program recognizes, and the program probably (again, conjecture, but an educated guess) has not been written to accommodate adding multiple, unlimited "walls". Having a spell which made use of 3+ magical paths could mean major rewriting of primary functions within the program itself. Now, the number of paths, as we already know, is already a multiple. A large and arbitrary number. Expanding them would be more along the lines of adding a new unit to the game. You might have to "build a few shelves" here and there to hold and accommodate the expansion, but it's not going to cause the roof to cave in.

As for adding confusion for "newbies" or anyone else, I wasn't confused by the game, as is. I'm not confused now, and the only version of Dom I've played has been Dom 3.0. I never even played the demo, and I'm the one suggesting the "confusing" ideas here.
Why is everyone so desperately protective of the "poor, fragile, stupid newbies"? I'm still a newbie. It's a big, big game and it takes a while to learn. I'm just happy to have the chance to learn it. Expanding the magic system, even drastically, isn't going to effect the learning curve that much. I hardly see how one of your so-called "newbies" is going to be more lost in a game with 27 magic paths than they already would be in a game which has 1500+ units, dozens upon dozens of concepts, spells by the score, etc etc etc.

I understand that you like the game as it is. I do too, very enthusiastically, which is why I'd like to see it grow and expand and live. If it doesn't grow, and expand, and add new ideas and concepts and continue to evolve creatively, then it's going to...well maybe not die, but it will stagnate. Someone, somewhere, is going to be writing the very best, ultimate, end-all-be-all turn based fantasy strategy game, and if it's not Illwinter, then it's going to be someone else. Now I already put my money down and spent the time and effort to involve myself in this game. I'd really rather not have to go through all that again. Just don't expect that I'm going to be satisfied with a game that stops.
I guess my problem-and I admit I have a problem-is that you're telling me that my ideas aren't any good, but nowhere in this thread can I find a place where you've expressed an original, creative idea of your own. Infact you've only posted twice and yes, you did ask for more dual-path spells, and I agree with you, but other than that, once we've accepted that this can be a confusing, unwieldy game because of it's size, you're criticizing in a not particularly productive way. I honestly don't have a problem with the critique, though. If you don't see a point to doing it, that's fine. You're happy with the game as it stands. "Not even remotely worthwhile to code" is a little harsh, and I take it a little personally, since I put a lot of effort and passion into my ideas, but that's fine and I can't expect everyone to agree with me.

This is UninspiredName's thread, so I don't know what his intentions for it are, but I'm thinking that this is a thread where we're talking about ideas and how things can be better, not how things should stay the same, so maybe it's not an area to which you have a meaningful contribution? If you do, that's fine and I'd like to hear what you have to say. If I'm wrong and Uninspired would rather I get off the longwinded posts and out of his thread, then I'll gladly go and create my own thread and that's fine too, but my POINT as we eluded to over your last post and my reply to it is that the game is good, but it could be better, and the magic system is an area which should be examined for improvement, including-but not limited to-the addition of "flavor".

[Agrajag]

HoneyBadger said:
Agrajag, "your idea", atleast the one you seem to be referencing, is the one the developers had, namely dual-path spells. Which is great, because that's already in the game, and you're right, it wouldn't be very much trouble to code in, because again it's already there in the game. Fully coded. If it is the point you're trying to make, then I thank you for the information, but I already figured that much out. I think it took me almost an hour of actually playing version 3.0, but I might have picked it up when I was paging through the manual. I've misplaced my manual though, so I can't confirm that for you at this time.

I'll just comment that this paragraph seems very hostile to me.
I'm not sure if you are intentionally being hostile (in which case you should beware the ban-bat), a bit too excited (which is usually not very bad), just unintentionally being hostile (in which case, just say so), or maybe I'm just reading it wrong.

Now, if their are spells in the game that do at this time utilize/require more than two paths, then maybe I have missed them or just have not been paying attention, but I believe that currently-insofar as my limited knowledge extends-there are no spells which require 3+ areas of knowledge to make use of them. Am I right? Again, I don't know where my manual's gone to, I think it fell behind the little fridge next to my work computer, and their are too many wires back there for me to casually do a hunt with the barbeque tongs. I'll get to it one day when I have time and am not feeling particularly lazy.

Nope, no multi-path spells.

If you are, however, referencing multi-path spells, "multi" in this case meaning 3 or 4 or 5, providing they're not in some secret level of the game, ala Mario Underworld, and depending on the type of language the developers write in (like most languages, it's one I'm not directly "hands-on" familiar with), and the way an individual programmer works, chances are that yes, it would be more difficult to add in spells which require more than two types of magic than it would be to just rename and/or add more than two types of magic. The reason for this is programs are like a house. They have four walls and a roof. The 1 or 2 types of magic per spell is like one of the walls. It's a major, "load-bearing" concept that the program recognizes, and the program probably (again, conjecture, but an educated guess) has not been written to accommodate adding multiple, unlimited "walls". Having a spell which made use of 3+ magical paths could mean major rewriting of primary functions within the program itself. Now, the number of paths, as we already know, is already a multiple. A large and arbitrary number. Expanding them would be more along the lines of adding a new unit to the game. You might have to "build a few shelves" here and there to hold and accommodate the expansion, but it's not going to cause the roof to cave in.

I realize the principals of programming, I program a bit myself.
The truth is that without looking at the code, you can't tell how hard it will be to make any change.
Changing maximum of dual-path to multi-path could be just a matter of changing a few constants, and perhaps find-and-replace a few lines to include a "for" loop.
Changing maximum of paths could also be a huge project, just like you describe.
So unless you have access to the code, I seriously doubt your estimations of how hard anything would be to code.

As for adding confusion for "newbies" or anyone else, I wasn't confused by the game, as is. I'm not confused now, and the only version of Dom I've played has been Dom 3.0. I never even played the demo, and I'm the one suggesting the "confusing" ideas here.

It doesn't really matter who is suggesting it.
Just like if I suggested to kill all the Jews, it still would be a bad idea. (me being jewish, ofcourse)

Why is everyone so desperately protective of the "poor, fragile, stupid newbies"? I'm still a newbie. It's a big, big game and it takes a while to learn. I'm just happy to have the chance to learn it. Expanding the magic system, even drastically, isn't going to effect the learning curve that much. I hardly see how one of your so-called "newbies" is going to be more lost in a game with 27 magic paths than they already would be in a game which has 1500+ units, dozens upon dozens of concepts, spells by the score, etc etc etc.

Heck, I'd be confused if the game had 27 paths, especially if as you say some would branch off from others.
If you are suggesting that the number of magic paths can be changed just like that, like the number of units, then I'd have to disagree. When you play the game, you don't have to be aware of all 1500+ units to do well, it is enough to check the stats of a unit when you see it in combat, or remembering some general details (like abysia has heavy units). Magic however is quite different, you often have access to many paths, and many possibilities to consider, which would make it more difficult to handle.

I understand that you like the game as it is. I do too, very enthusiastically, which is why I'd like to see it grow and expand and live. If it doesn't grow, and expand, and add new ideas and concepts and continue to evolve creatively, then it's going to...well maybe not die, but it will stagnate. Someone, somewhere, is going to be writing the very best, ultimate, end-all-be-all turn based fantasy strategy game, and if it's not Illwinter, then it's going to be someone else. Now I already put my money down and spent the time and effort to involve myself in this game. I'd really rather not have to go through all that again. Just don't expect that I'm going to be satisfied with a game that stops.

That's true. The question however is in what areas the game needs to grow. I don't think that what you are suggesting is the right direction.

I guess my problem-and I admit I have a problem-is that you're telling me that my ideas aren't any good, but nowhere in this thread can I find a place where you've expressed an original, creative idea of your own.

I'm not saying your ideas aren't any good, I'm just saying that I don't think they would do good to Dominions.
Having many magic paths, especially stuff like time magic is indeed a cool idea, I agree, I just don't think Dominions is the right place to have it as things are right now.

Infact you've only posted twice and yes, you did ask for more dual-path spells, and I agree with you, but other than that, once we've accepted that this can be a confusing, unwieldy game because of it's size, you're criticizing in a not particularly productive way. I honestly don't have a problem with the critique, though. If you don't see a point to doing it, that's fine. You're happy with the game as it stands. "Not even remotely worthwhile to code" is a little harsh, and I take it a little personally, since I put a lot of effort and passion into my ideas, but that's fine and I can't expect everyone to agree with me.

Well, I may have been a bit too harsh, and if you took it personally, then I'm sorry.


As for what my idea regarding this is...
Well, what I'm saying is that we already have 36 possible combinations of spell paths (8 basic + 28 pairs of dual-path), and we can already utilize them in a way similar to what you suggest (though not exactly the same. And you might even consider it very different).
Is there really a reason why you have to have "life magic" and nature+astral won't do?
Is there really a need for a specific name for something that can already be represented by dual-paths?
I think not.

[PhilD]

I can't understand why tempers typically get so hot when discussing this game. Why can't people stay civil?

(BTW, if Truper reads this, it might be a good idea to update the "posting etiquette" thread that I read each time I get to the end of unread posts, to ask posters to keep their tempers)