Forgotten Kingdoms Forums

I have a stupid, more generic question... that comes to me reading the alchemy subject

In standard D&D rules, there are not so many components. Only a few spells have a specific component with a given worth.
I wondered why in fk it was chosen to add so many components, forcing spellcasters to either spend tons of time gathering them or to use only half of their spells.
Non spellcasting class don't have such a pain to use all their skills, and I'm not sure the fact there are so many components brings or improves the rp (which is the main part of this mud to me). Are there other things those components bring to the game and to the gameplay?

As Isolrem said, there would be more diversity in the spells used in game without that, and probably more fun.

Having more components unused when casting the spells could make it more fun I think.

Just a thinking...


El

I don't find that stupid at all, though my opinion is worth less than a horse turd. The only positive aspect of having so many components is encouraging trade between PC's, but it's a fairly hard learning curve that I never mastered in finding all of them and keeping your spell pouches stocked.

Maybe even a scaling component value?

Like Component XYZ has a value of 100.

Level 1 spell would reduce it to 99 after one cast.
Level 5 spell would reduce it to 95 after one cast.
Level 9 spell would reduce it to 91 after one cast.

That way for one component you'd get 100 casts of a level 1 spell that uses it, or 10(or 11) casts of a level 9 spell that uses the same component, or any mix inbetween like 5 castings of a level 9, and 50something of level 1 spells. The only problem is you cast a level 9 spell eleven times, you are left with 1 point of value left, and according to the above not able to cast a level 9 spell. Easily resolved by making it so whatever value is left can provide one last casting of the spell, providing the spell level is higher than the value.

Numerics could be subject to change, the above is just a half-baked example. Mostly I'd like to just see the uses of components stretched out more, yet still balanced and able to provide ample trade opportunities.

Any system that ensures Gate is casted less often than magic missiles is fine in my book, but my opinion ranks up there with Isaldur's horse turd value.

I honestly don't know why spells like teleport, gate, astral walk, etc. are treated so delicately in FK. None of these spells have components beyond verbal/somatic in the official rules. The only exception to this is that gate can also be used to 'call' creatures from various planes for an XP cost; I do not believe this is coded as such in FK.

I don't have time to write a longer response to the issue, but I've noticed the topic of spell components pop up in several places of late. I don't have a problem with most spells having simple components. However, with player-run shops (and imm-run) being disabled and other factors, it seems exceedingly troublesome to acquire most of these simple components.

Furthermore, another couple of issues (in my opinion):

1) Alchemy is practically necessary for most spellcasters to produce certain components for their spells. However, it was stated that the purpose of alchemy was to make casters more self-sufficient, not for selling purposes (although some players still try to sell their alchemy outputs). The issues with this are:

- Alchemy should not be "almost required" for these components. I believe all of these components that alchemy makes can be found elsewhere in-game, but many of these are nearly impossible to acquire in any reasonable amount outside of alchemy. As such, alchemy becomes necessary for spell casters to supply themselves with components.

- If alchemy were to remain as it is, then it needs to be far more readily available. Right now it's only available by learning from other PCs, but it seems the PCs that know alchemy are few and far between. I completely understand that training alchemy encourages roleplay - I'm all for that. But the demand for alchemy far outweighs the supply for alchemy and seems to be causing headaches in regards to acquiring spell components.

2) Some spell components just seem outright impossible to acquire, even for simple spells. The spell component for floating disc (a level 1 spell) is a good example. The component is from an element that naturally occurs in Earth's crust. While it is not the most common ore found, it is still mined all over the world. I know that Faerun is not Earth, but they can be compared similarly.

Again, these are just my thoughts.

Well, I'm all for reviewing the component system in general, but what I would see is a review to make cost depending on level and not having level 9 spells costing less than level 1 spells.

And I would see that the higher level the spell is, the harder the component to cast it is found.

Another thing, Teleporting in DnD have nothing to do with teleporting in FK.
A lot of spells were added to FK for "balance" issues, normally teleporting is a mage business with Teleport, Greater Teleport and Teleportation Circle.
Priests have some easy travel means but no teleport so to speak, and Gate is something entirely different, it opens a gate to another plane, with all the risks involved. If you RP it correctly in FK, it is not a spell you use lightly and on every whim (not without IC consequence pending anyway :p) and I think the high component cost helps regulate it a bit, that and the fact that I think not many wizards have it now.

Well, it's only my opinion anyway.

How does teleporting in FK have nothing to do with teleporting in D&D?

- In FK, teleport is a level 7 spell. In D&D, greater teleport is a level 7 spell.
- In FK, teleport has no range and takes you to the PC/Mob you specify. In D&D, greater teleport has no range and takes you to the destination you specify.
- In FK, teleport can fail and take you somewhere random. In D&D, greater teleport always succeeds.
- In FK, teleport has a material component (expensive at that). In D&D, greater teleport has no material component.
- In FK, teleport only teleports yourself. In D&D, greater teleport can bring along yourself plus one extra medium-sized creature (or smaller) for every 3 levels of the caster.

So yes, there are differences between teleport in FK and greater teleport in D&D, namely in that we made teleport far more difficult to use. However, their functionality as an overall spell are nearly identical.

1. Alchemy is fine, in theory. As more learn it, we need to increase shard rates to compensate though.... 3 people racing for 5 shards is one thing, 10 after 5 shards is a train wreck.

2. Alchemy, learning. There may be a problem, not arguing that. However, I don't see alot of folks asking about it and honestly, I actually expected a bump after boards came back into circulation. Message posts? Nope, just a few brewing teacher requests. Random inquires around the market or other gatherings? Not really. It may just be my limited time online that is causing this problem, but I really don't see much interest. And one of my characters is not shy about mentioning his lessons!

3. Gate and other travel spells. I'd rather they be easier to learn, but I have no problems with them being difficult to cast. I really don't want to see gate as common as fly/air walk. Just doesn't feel right to me.

Nysan wrote:1. Alchemy is fine, in theory. As more learn it, we need to increase shard rates to compensate though.... 3 people racing for 5 shards is one thing, 10 after 5 shards is a train wreck.

2. Alchemy, learning. There may be a problem, not arguing that. However, I don't see alot of folks asking about it and honestly, I actually expected a bump after boards came back into circulation. Message posts? Nope, just a few brewing teacher requests. Random inquires around the market or other gatherings? Not really. It may just be my limited time online that is causing this problem, but I really don't see much interest. And one of my characters is not shy about mentioning his lessons!

3. Gate and other travel spells. I'd rather they be easier to learn, but I have no problems with them being difficult to cast. I really don't want to see gate as common as fly/air walk. Just doesn't feel right to me.

Let's save the travel spells for another thread.

As for alchemy, I think people are afraid to teach it because of the problem you explained in bullet 1. The more people they teach, the less shards they are going to get because of more competition (note, I know nothing about alchemy).

Secondly, I just found out ICly about alchemy for the very first time yesterday. Granted, I was gone for a year, but alchemy still seems to be few and far between.

I'm all for supporting alchemy in function. I'm just stating that currently it is not effective and is hurting those that don't know it.

Athon wrote: As for alchemy, I think people are afraid to teach it because of the problem you explained in bullet 1. The more people they teach, the less shards they are going to get because of more competition (note, I know nothing about alchemy).

I think that's nonsense. I've never heard anyone asking around in groups of people if they know anyone that can teach alchemy, but they often ask if they known anyone who will sell stones made using it. I have two characters that would be willing to teach if anyone ever asked and I doubt that I'm the only one that feels that way. I think a lot of people know fine and well what a pain it is to collect shards so they'd rather someone else did it and they just pay them for the end result.

Alchemy has been around for well over a year now, I think the lack of interest might just be because it's lost the new shine it had at the beginning.

Wasn't trying to single anyone out, speaking in general. I really don't see requests for teaching Alchemy. And again, not shy about mentioning it nor picky on who can get lessons.
I have taught everyone that asked, or am waiting for them to get back to me.... which adds up to about 5 people since I learned Alchemy a long time ago (oddly the same number of people I have given Gond Forge lessons to, hehe).
Even though I am not picky about competition, I still worry about supply/demand on shards. Starting to feel like out-of-stock shop syndrome, waiting on the shard-shop to restock... *shrug*

That's stupid, it is very easy to learn alchemy, you just need to ask around and have a few people always willing to teach, it took Eltsac 2 tell and 5 minute sto find a teacher.. (even if he still have to get his lesson now that the boards are back in the game, blame Damaris for the lack of time )

Yet, I think there should be random "shardmaker', with a very very low rand entry prog giving a chance to discover it while walking a room (somewhat similar to geography). I don't think it's very hard to do and could be fun to stumble upon a shard randomly while adventuring instead of fixed farmed locations.

I could easily imagine Alchemy and Precision forge being the only means for those high level uber spells.

Lirith wrote:

Athon wrote: As for alchemy, I think people are afraid to teach it because of the problem you explained in bullet 1. The more people they teach, the less shards they are going to get because of more competition (note, I know nothing about alchemy).

I think that's nonsense. I've never heard anyone asking around in groups of people if they know anyone that can teach alchemy, but they often ask if they known anyone who will sell stones made using it. I have two characters that would be willing to teach if anyone ever asked and I doubt that I'm the only one that feels that way. I think a lot of people know fine and well what a pain it is to collect shards so they'd rather someone else did it and they just pay them for the end result.

Alchemy has been around for well over a year now, I think the lack of interest might just be because it's lost the new shine it had at the beginning.

Even if you haven't encountered the situation of competition yet doesn't mean it can be ruled as nonsense. It's the simple combination of human nature with competition. Fortunately, it seems we have good players (Nysan, Lirith, etc) that are more-than-happy to teach it. But I cannot proclaim that assumption to be inclusive for all alchemy PCs nor would I ever deem it nonsense, based off the several posts I've seen saying that alchemy shards are not in stock enough.

Again, I will reiterate: I knew about alchemy OOCly. I've been back for about 5 months now and just found out ICly for the first time about alchemy on any of my toons. Alchemy is just not broadcast enough right now. Sure, alchemy might have lost some of its luster, but mining and smithing are as old as dirt and they are booming more than ever. I just don't feel that alchemy is being facilitated enough as it needs to be.

I have two characters who know and use Alchemy, one will freely teach anyone who asks and has done so pretty much from day one. The other is a bit more selfish but will certainly teach it to 'people' of the right persuasion. And i know at least 2 or 3 very active characters who teach the rituals as well. So i dont see an argument for the non availability of teachers.

As far as the availability of shards that is a different matter. I do think you should be able to get more shards from a given formation as this is currently the limiter on actually making components. It requires 12 small shards of various types to make a single usable component. Personally i would double the number of shards from a formation from 5 to 10, this would still mean visiting several formations to make anything useful but would not be as annoying as currently.

Oddly my Drow character has stunningly good availability of a couple of types of shards and this has driven him into trade RP with certain evil surface folk to get the other shards he needs. And he did this so that he could supply another evil character with the components they needed. So i do think alchemy is a positive thing in general as it does spur some RP.

Duranamir

When Alchemy first came out Zorinar jumped on the wagon and learned all the rituals to it. Mostly, it was because the cost of the stones was so high. Soon after though, I realized what a chore it is. I felt like I was back in star wars galaxies again, having to run all over the map, wasting a few RL days just to get enough shards for maybe 3 or 4 stones... After a while, more and more people started gaining the skill and it got to the point that all the locations were tapped out when I would get to them. It because such a chore that I just don't cast the spells that require the stones, or I buy them from merchants at full price. The time required is not justified by some of the spells that use the stones. In my opinion, alchemy as it is, is a flawed system. Secondly, the component system as a whole is a flawed system. The price and availability for some components has no relation to the spell used for it. For example, Black onyx gems are used for animate dead. I dont know if they are used for another spell, but I have not seen any other spell that uses them. One such location for sale is in the a temple that would in NO WAY SHAPE OR FORM condone the use of such a spell. And they allow it to only be sold to faith members. That makes no sense. There are other examples, but basically I believe some thought and review should go into the component system.

It depends on the world. In Dragonlance, almost every spell requires a different component (I'm basing this on novel resources, not the rpg) Though certain spells require unique components and the rest generalized. For the most part I would say that fk mirrors that aspect of Dungeons and Dragons more so than Forgotten Realms.

For the record, there are a few other spells out there that require said black onyx gems as I found out recently. Your particular wizard just doesn't have the spells that require them.

I'm not even going to bother to join the alchemy debate; quite honestly, I do enough traveling around FK's realm just doing "fetch quests" in my spare time to even think about trying to collect shards. Even still, from the other three I talk to who do utilize alchemy on a semi-regular basis (who are also casters), do vent to me from time to time about what a PITA it is to create gems in both time involvement of the material gathering and when you accidentally mess up and whatever happens there.

What I would like to see addressed is:

• Component deficiency

Of which, there's been recent relevant debate here.

• Component consumption rate

I doubt I need to get specific here as there's been plenty of related debate here.

• Components for spell revision

Which seems to have just been brought up in this thread, but probably deserves its own thread.

I've already stated my feelings on the first two subjects, but the final one I'll address here:
There's no reason to go 'reinventing the wheel' in FK just to be different. There's absolutely no reason why we should be changing components to be more difficult to find than in D&D, require more expensive components for spells than in D&D, or even (in my opinion) debate logic as to restrictions on component availability.

Let's face it, the balancing has already been done for us. Wizards of the Coast (the owners of D&D) took the time to do it and create a system that has been gone through playtesting and been launched for years now.

Selveem wrote:For the record, there are a few other spells out there that require said black onyx gems as I found out recently. Your particular wizard just doesn't have the spells that require them.

This is true... which puts even more pressure on the lack of black onyx gems in circulation.

This thread is making me a little cross-eyed, trying to keep up with the topics at hand.

Are we complaining that the current component situation is too exhaustive/expensive/confusing, or that some reagents are too hard to find (due to the reliance on alchemy or whatever)? Eltsac seemed more aggrieved by the first point, whereas a lot of your responses are focussed on the latter.

Gwain summarises what I've always believed to be the case very well. The spell components used in game seem to tie up with those referred to in the various novels (what few I've begrudgingly read) rather than those explicitly stated in rule books. I've always rather enjoyed the fact that you always need to be prepared as a wizard, and I've seen some of the catalysts and their reasons described very nicely in wizardly roleplay, but I agree that the scarcity of some components can frustrate matters.

I propose that a constructive way to take this discussion forward would be to think about solutions to the dearth of x, y or z component, considering where we can add some to the MUD, and how we can go about creating a more balanced availability - preferably without just making them all accessible on wandering merchants!

Of course it's just as likely that I've got the wrong end of the stick and that just adding more sources for components won't help any issues you currently have - in which case I'm all ears*!

* but not literally. Eating and breathing would be beyond a joke, as would most forms of every-day social interaction. Besides, I'd be making my living as 'The Incredible Ear Man' in real life, and wouldn't have the time to spend reading forums on the internet. It's food for thought.

Well from a literary standpoint, Dragonlance wizards are weak, but in comparison to anything in Forgotten Realms, almost anything in that D&D world is weak!

They do give good examples though, Raistlin, a mage wandering away from his companions to gather herbals for spell components. The contents of his spell pouch and belt, skulls, feathers, beads.

A wizard using an amber rod and a bit of fur to generate chain lightning and so forth.

Generally components always have a meaning to me, every spell has a purpose intertwined with its component.

The best thing to do might be to do something similar to the new trade system, have a forage skill linked to the spell at hand, a wizard or priest would be able to gather a component from the wild after a certain amount of time has passed (Be they online or offline) and then use the component. This could work for organic components. Rare ones like the gems could be added to the mining trade. Byproduct components (soots and salts, powders) could be made with existing systems like grinders. Metal objects still with the precision forge. Gooeys like body parts could still be taken from monstrous foes etc.

I'm not really to concerned either way though, I tend to manage the middle way, if I lack a component, I don't use the spell, sometimes I know I could benefit from the spell, but I just manage. I still think that were better off than a lot of other worlds in the scope of what we have.

My idea is not so refined though, all I could think of though. Love the new trade system, would not mind seeing it in more elements of the mud.

The fact remains, however, that it seems we have lots of spells with components simply for the sake of having components.

• A validation between source and FK's current component list would ease this issue.

Honestly, as much as I appreciate and value the idea, I don't think I can bear another timesink 'system.' While I have plenty of playing time right now, that's not always been (or going to be) the case. Additionally, the extended amount of time for gathering components and the like would hurt the casual gamer even more.

I don't understand why just purchasing the silly components required is truly so frowned upon. I don't buy into the whole 'it decreases player interaction' bit because it's always existed as an option and behold: players still interact.

Also, though I hate to beat a dead horse:

D20srd.org wrote:Spell Component Pouch

A spellcaster with a spell component pouch is assumed to have all the material components and focuses needed for spellcasting, except for those components that have a specific cost, divine focuses, and focuses that wouldn't fit in a pouch.