Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 12

Thread: Mentalism Spell: Enrapture

  1. #1

    Mentalism Spell: Enrapture

    Aaron said in this thread: http://forum.wastelands-interactive....970-some-ideas that there could be a mentalism spell that could capture a town:

    Quote Originally Posted by Aaron View Post
    Also, stealing entire towns with powerful metalism spells is fairly awesome
    So, I think this should actually be a city enchantment that costs a mana upkeep each turn. If you stop paying the upkeep, the city goes back to the original owner (or non-alligned if it was independent). I do think that the larger the city, the more resistance it should have- with capitals having a super high resistance. What do you guys think?

  2. #2
    Archmage of the Inner Ring ampoliros's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    1,662
    Here's my take: I think the reversion should be tied to capture unrest.
    I don't know what the plan is in regards to unrest in captured cities. If for example there is extra unrest for 20 turns when you would normally capture a city, the game would still keep track of the 20 turns when you cast Enrapture, just not give you the extra unrest. Then after 20 turns the upkeep stops and the city is yours. If the upkeep stops before the 20 turns, then the city reverts.

  3. #3
    Sorcerer Greybriar's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    68
    I agree with you, Troy. A spell that can steal a city is too much like a spy's espionage ability in Civilization and other games I've played. I didn't like that ability in the Civ series or any other game and it doesn't appeal to me here. However, if it is tied to mana upkeep like other echantment spells, that would make it a lot easier to sell to me and other gamers who share my views.

    Like you, I think that the larger the city, the more resistance it should have with capitals having a very high resistance.

  4. #4
    Yeah, I think an upkeep cost is the only way to keep the spell fair. It would be a fun strategy to try to conquer an opponent's cities using just magic, but if it were easy, that strategy would just be too unfair IMHO.

  5. #5
    I think winning through magic spells would be fun. But yeah, it has to be balanced. Some kind of upkeep is needed.

  6. #6
    Apprentice
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    26
    Cool idea for a spell. Maybe there could be some discipline combination that would let you win the game with it. That might be going too far though.

  7. #7
    Sorcerer
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Budapest, Hungary
    Posts
    71
    I also support the idea of this spell being a city enchantment with upkeep and resistance based on a city size.
    Also, unrest is a good point, which might further influence things: for example, the higher unrest is in a given a city, the easier it could be to capture it with this spell, since the population in unrest is longing for some sort of change (for better or worse), so it does not resist such attempts that heavily.
    Also, a city under the effect of this spell should have no unrest at all; after all, the population is enraptured​.

    ---------- Post added at 10:05 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:58 PM ----------

    However, another side of this issue that just came to mind: what about any units already present and trained in the enraptured city...?

    Logically, they too should work the same way as the city: they too get an "Enraptured" enchantment (also with upkeep) and would be controlled by the caster as long as the enchantment lasts. Enrapture on the individual units can be cancelled individually, but if it is cancelled from the city, then it will also be cancelled on all the units as well which were enraptured along with it...?

    Also, if the spell is cancelled from a unit which is still in the city or on any tile together with formerly "allied" units, then should the unit instantly be killed by the others, expelled from that tile to a nearby empty tile or should this immediately result in a tactical combat scene with the just liberated unit(s) versus those still under your command...?

    Or maybe there should be an option of keeping the units after letting go of the city...?

    Should individual units or a stack of units also be valid targets for this spell...?

  8. #8
    Those are some very good questions. If the stack of units were just booted outside the city, you'd lose it to attack the next turn. So that's out. Perhaps each unit would get a saving throw vs. the Enrapture spell. Those that fail to resist join your side. Those that do, are booted outside the city. This might be something that we'd have to playtest- if the spell makes it in

  9. #9
    Sorcerer
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Budapest, Hungary
    Posts
    71
    Quote Originally Posted by Troy_Costisick View Post
    Those are some very good questions. If the stack of units were just booted outside the city, you'd lose it to attack the next turn. So that's out. Perhaps each unit would get a saving throw vs. the Enrapture spell. Those that fail to resist join your side. Those that do, are booted outside the city. This might be something that we'd have to playtest- if the spell makes it in
    Best, simplest and most realistic IMO would be an instant tactical combat scene within the city, fought between the successfully Enraptured and the successfully resisted units. This could also add some extra excitement and even if you would lose the combat, you still would have significantly weakened the defenders - and/or even if you lose, nothing prevents you from casting Enrapture on the same city again... this might be quite a nasty a trick indeed: just position a more significant strike force near the target city, then cast Enrapture on it. If you succeed, great - and if not (not even in the instant combat), the defenses of the city are still decimated and your units should now have a much more easier time in conquering the city.

  10. #10
    Apprentice
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Lund, Sweden
    Posts
    30
    Quote Originally Posted by Troy_Costisick View Post
    So, I think this should actually be a city enchantment that costs a mana upkeep each turn. If you stop paying the upkeep, the city goes back to the original owner (or non-alligned if it was independent). I do think that the larger the city, the more resistance it should have- with capitals having a super high resistance. What do you guys think?
    The upkeep would have to be a temporary thing, I think. Start it off at a very high level (comparable to the initial casting cost, even?), but taper it down to zero over the course of 20 or 25 turns. Otherwise, if it's a permanent drain on your mana just to continue holding on to the city, then the more sensible use is to Enrapture the city, move the defenders away from it, march in your own army, then drop the spell and let your army conquer/pacify the city non-magically. While that's still effective, it seems to defeat the point and flavor of a "capture town" spell - it's no longer something unique, just yet another way to nuke a city's defenders before the army moves in and does the real work.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
footer