Spells and Magic in Eisenstern

by _Tentus_ on 02/26/2007 00:38, 14 messages, last message: 11/28/2009 10:32, 1897 views, last view: 05/02/2024 23:14, closed on 11/29/2009 03:42

I was studying the docs on Eisenstern and the comment about spells falling into "one use" and "many use" got me wondering about the laws we'll be applying to magic. If I read right, any "many use" spell will require ammo of sorts... red, yellow, and blue. Red ammo will be plentiful, while blue ammo will be rare (in relation to availability in general).

So we already have two schools of magic, single- and multi-use. Multi-use is further subdivided into potency requirements. Is there going to be a system on top of these systems, possibly the classic fire/water/earth/air system? Perhaps comething more unusual, such as a Zodiac system? Or, in light of the simplistic-ism, will spells just be categorized into attack/defend/motion/interaction, etc?

I've been working on some spell concepts and I realized I have no idea what I should pattern them after. Should I follow Nordic runes? Perhaps hieroglyphics, or transmutation circles? Do spells even have to have a written form, or can they be summoned out of items with no visible reaction?

Speaking of which, what is the status on summonable monsters? The design notes lead me to believe that summoned monsters act just like normal monster, except on your side. Should they look just like normal monsters, or should we design new skins to make them easily discernible?

Finally, how much will magic be tied into weapons? Are we going to be making magic swords or are the two going to remain separate? Any input is welcome.

   Board Index   

#1: ..

by Aardappel_ on 02/26/2007 01:59

single vs multi use are available for all spells... its just a gameplay feature meant to make the single use ones cheap and easy to get, and the multi use ones are very expensive, but of course way more useful in the long run.

There's no plan for elements system or anything like that.

The whole game is medieval/fantasy themed, so any spells that go along with that will do. But nordic fit in as part of that.

The summonable monsters will be identical to the normal monsters. We already have wolves, bears, dragons etc, and you can spawn these too, thru either single or multi use spells.

Magic swords and such can easily be custom made at some point... there will be plenty of flexibility in attributes given to an item.

reply to this message

#2: Cool.

by _Tentus_ on 02/26/2007 02:38

Ok, how will a player know their monster from other monsters, other than watching them fight- will the crosshair change or something?

Nordic runes should work really well, I'll see what I can do to make it look cool. Yay for Thor!

New question... how will the imventory work? Will it be a menu brought up by a button, or will it be a part of the HUD that is tied to specific buttons, such as the number keys? Should I be making little icons to go with the spells I'm working on, and if so, what size should they be (I'm guessing 32x32?)

reply to this message

#3: ..

by makkE on 02/26/2007 09:15

Guess you should make them 64², just like all other icons..

reply to this message

#4: Re: Cool.

by Aardappel_ on 02/26/2007 09:19, refers to #2

Its too early to tell how we will differentiate "friendly" monsters, probably by the name over their head, yes.

I'd make icon art in 64x64 yes... Since an RPG can have hundreds of items, my plan was to make sure each of those has a unique icon, but they won't have unique models (i.e. all spells may look the same when placed as an object in the game world). We may even render the icons on generic boxes in the game world.

reply to this message

#5: Re: Cool.

by Pxtl on 02/26/2007 16:05, refers to #4

The "generic boxes" sounds bad until you consider how nicely it's worked for ammo in Cube/Sauer. I'd like that approach, you could use a different model for each class and just render the icon on the model - even show the complete model + icon in inventory. EG for spells, you do a spellbook with the icon logo on the cover, and a scroll with a big icon seal on it for limited-use spells. For potions, a flask with a label. Hard to do the same with weapons since weapons tend to be long and thin, though - you'd have to create a spot on the weapon for the icon - like a big circle in the middle of the crosspiece of a sword.

reply to this message

#6: ..

by _Tentus_ on 02/26/2007 16:27

I like the idea of hvaing very different models for each type- if Eisenstern is going to have the plethora of items planned, then users will benefit from having visually unique models for each area.

Will we end up putting all the spell icons into a single PNG, and all the food icons into a single PNG, etc, or will they all be separate, or will they be all clumped together? If they're all separate then it'll be easy to add new items over time, but having them in groups seems easier to manage.

With swords and such we could always try putting them on a plaque or something, or maybe have them stabbed into little stone blocks. That'd give us the surface area to put icons on.

reply to this message

#7: Re: ..

by Aardappel_ on 02/26/2007 23:10, refers to #6

its not that it isn't better to have seperate models, its just that its impractical initially. A project like this will always struggle to have the art required initially, but if this game has been out for a while and it attracts artists, no reason why we can't make unique models. Just to get started, icons will get us to the goal quicker.

reply to this message

#8: Gotcha.

by _Tentus_ on 02/27/2007 00:57

Ok, next question (i feel so demanding, I'm sorry)... naming conventions. Should I com up with names like Fire Blast, Frost Choke, Dark Consumption, (an action coupled with a magic-y descriptor), or should they be Latin/Nordic/whatever (Expecto Patronus!), or should I be sticking to something simpler like Lightning (Rank I)?

Oh, and should I try to keep a corner unbusy so there's space for a digit to made out (for rank or available ammo), or will all the relevant information be outside the icon? I suppose that question will be answered once the UI for spells is put up though, won't it? =P

Again, sorry if I'm sounding demanding.

reply to this message

#9: Re: Gotcha.

by Aardappel_ on 02/27/2007 04:11, refers to #8

don't make assumptions on usage yet. I very much welcome you making art assets before code, as that will make testing code & gameplay much easier when it starts to work... but just let the name whatever describes the way it looks, not its intended functionality.

reply to this message

#10: yay

by cnrkirk on 02/28/2007 07:16

an artist so we dont have to stand... programmer art... in the next beta...



programmer art... ugh...

reply to this message

#11: ..

by sinsky on 02/28/2007 13:54

Programmer art can be cool imo :)

reply to this message

#12: Programmer Art

by Morosoph on 02/28/2007 16:57

" Programmer art can be cool imo :) "

Yeah, seriously nerdcore!

reply to this message

#13: ..

by _Tentus_ on 03/01/2007 02:02

I actually kind of like programmer art. Given that I'm not 100% on what the end products should look like, a form of programmer art is actually what I'm just a bit less cel-shady.

reply to this message

#14: Bug

by Manmachine01 on 11/28/2009 10:32

When i add some things like quests weapons and npc's to the Eisenstern CFG file, all npc change model to moneybag and dont move. Mman's quest log not showing too

reply to this message

   Board Index