What's with nerfed spell durations?

[JesterOI]

What was the point of reducing spell durations other than to hurt low level players? Because that is all it does is place a hardship on low level players who don't have the levels to keep their spells around for long...

[Chimaira]

I think thats the point...
to make it harder for casters to lvl.
Not that I like it, balance should lie in the items rather then nerf everything so badly that a mage is just a bit harder to lvl.

[JesterOI]

But only hurts the < 6 lvls spellcaster, not the higher ups...

[dond]

yea, those don't make sense.........how will it affect anything other than lower level casters?

the acid sheath is fine i guess, now mages are dead in melee. (they're not supposed to melee anyway lol)

but what about igms? it still hits EVERY target in the mages field of view for 100 magical damage..........it should be around 5 targets max.

and where's the limit to the number of IKDs and called shots attempted per round?!?

where's the HiPS nerf?
don't even get me started on clerics! man, divine favor and divine power need to be removed from the game.....

oh, and boost druids! shifters need tons of help...

[Chimaira]

Druids own dond, their the next best thing after clerics, and even better in some situations. Clerics are generally more overpowered because of the DP bug, DP is a spell thats basicly impossible to work right due to limitations in scripting. Its supposed to add BAB, but thats not possible in NWNs game engine, so they just make it temporary attack bonus, and give them a bonus attack while they sometimes shouldnt gain it(because they took 4 fighters lvls before lvl 20 for instance) The same is true with the AB being incorrect, my lvl 20, 16 BAB 16 cleric/4 fighter should gain no attacks, and +4 BAB, yet he gains an extra attack and +5 attack bonus. Its even harder to make it work now that epic lvls are in, you cant tell wheter that 30 cleric/10 ftr took his 10 ftr lvls pre-20 for AB and feats, or wheter he took them after 20 for epic bonus feats, maybe he took a few of them before 20 and the rest after 20? Only the BAB can tell, BUT who says a 30 cleric/5 ftr/5 monk didnt take 5 monk lvls pre-20 which lowers his BAB, but he shouldnt gain it with DP since DP only covers CLERIC lvls.
If its possible to make it work right(so far the best that people been able to do was nerf it so its still a decent spell to use, while not being overpowered) then thats all the better, the only thing possible the way I know is to just nerf it, or ban it(but thats a little extreme aint it?)

[Psycho Dordt]

let DP only give an AB bonus, and no bonus attacks

[Denort]

I have to agree with some of these spell durations, Hold Person lasts for about 2 rounds at level 7. Seems like a rather pointless spell. Maybe all these spells with durations of 1 round per 3 levels or so should be 5 rounds + 1 round per 3 levels. It would make them a little more useful at low levels but not that much different later on.
On the bright side, I do like the way Darkfire is handled now. No loss of cleave due to on-hit effects and the fire damage gets multiplied on criticals.

[Æ]

Hold shouldn't last long enough for you to slowly beat down a warrior of equal level as he stands there defenseless, it should just hold him long enoguh for you to cast a spell or two... after all that's really all it takes anyway, you'd most likely win anyway

Did you ever wath the mirk worgs and ogres in haddon mirk fight eachother before the durations were turned down? By all rights the ogres should win, but the worgs were casting hold on them all and very slowly clawing them up a few HP at a time for over a minute, usually killing them before the spell wore off

As far as I'm concerned, most spells should be turned down since all the non caster classes do very little damage in NS4

[Chimaira]

Hold spells aint what I was referring to, those just last too bloody long because of the amount of caster levels you can get. Im not sure but i think their 1 round +1 round per 5 levels, ts around that and the spell doesnt last too long, or so short thats useless. Its the buff spells what I meant, not much point in changing a 1 hour/lvl spell to 1 turn/lvl.

[Alanthaleous]

Why not give melee special Items the fighters can only use... refine it more you have to be a certain lvl in fighter to use... none of this lvl 1 fighter and lvl 39 mage crap just to use fighter items... would blance the table a bit and pull the rug out from under those uber mage classes that have no equal in the game

[Denort]

Sure, I agree totally about the long durations of spells in particular those that completely debilitates the target but Hold Person appears to last 1 round per 3 levels. So when you get the spell at level 3, it lasts 1 round making it less useful than a bard with straight 13s.

Assume a level 3 cleric's action for the round is to cast Hold Person and the fighter fails his save and is held. By the time the next round comes along and the cleric can perform another action the Hold Person spell has already expired. All it did was extend the fight by one round and consume what could have been a spontaneous healing spell for the cleric.

Spells should be useful when you get them. A duration of 5 rounds + 1 round per 3 (or even 1 per 4 or 1 per 5) would not make the duration excessive but still allow it to be useful when the caster first gets the spell.

[Æ]

In the case of the cleric he would usually cast hold, then his summon would tear up the fighter, and since most clerics have alot of melee ability as well, the cleric will often take out a sword and join the summon in beating on the immobilized, flatfooted (and therefore easier to hit) target

Even being held one round, it's devestating, and it lasts longer as the caster levels

[Chimaira]

Exactly, and in the case of the cleric having a rather powerfull summon now, 1 round the summon gets to beat on the fighter is a bad round for the fighter. What about that spontaneous heal spell? Isnt that just increasing the duration of the battle for another round, while you could have held the fighter and have your summon beat on him? Hold spells and death magic is the most used in pvp for a reason, hold even more since MANY classes have fortitude as a high saving throw, and any death magic that needs a will saving throw is only going to damage a bit if the fortitude save is succesfull as well(even tho weird shouldnt work that way). So against a fighter, a hold spell > healing spell in my oppinion, and the hold spells deserve to be smacked around with the nerf stick, since if you make the starting duration 5 rounds, youll have monks taking a few lvls of cleric so they can buff, and beside buffing, they can also hold fighters for a minimal of 5 rounds which is not good. My sorc holds fighters for 4 rounds now, and its long enough for my half celestial to kill a fighter equal to my lvl (which is lvl 16).

[SmurfZG]

with a druid you can ahve 3 companions, 1 summon, 1 druid companion and 1 animal empathy creature.. which makes the hold spell pretty good even for one round

[Joran]

I like the idea of spells having a base duration that then gets added on to by your caster level, rather than having it completely determined by caster level. It would allow the lower level spells to be a bit more effective early on without sacrificing much in the way of balance.

Something to add to the list. Denort, you should add this as a feature request to the bugtracker.