Re: Olympia: opinions on magical research

From: skrenta@cbnewsg.att.com (Rich Skrenta)

Date: Thu, 30 Apr 1992 01:03:34 +0000

Bill.Viggers@comp.vuw.ac.nz (Bill Viggers) writes:
> 	I like the magic research as it is, but I think you should be able to
> 	direct your research into an area, thus learning a spell in that
> 	area (if there is one available), and otherwise getting the
> 	'research finds no spells' type message.

> 	Yes, I like that some spells should be more difficult to learn than
> 	others (and I don't just mean taking longer to learn).  Of course
> 	those of us already at magic research 10 arn't going to suffer :->

So combining these two, you get a matrix:

magic skill  |   area
level        |  summoning weather far-seeing battle misc
-------------+------------------------------------------------------
	1    |              *
	2    |                                  *     *
	3    |
	4    |
	5    |              *
	6    |                          *
	7    |     *
	8    |     *
	9    |                          *              *
       10    |                                  *

With spells peppered throughout the table.  You'd say

use 106 weather

to try and learn a weather spell.  If one existed at or below your
skill level, you'd be able to discover it.

> 	Another thing I'd like is for the higher levels of magic research to
> 	make a real differance, currently the random factor is pretty high.

Yes, the random factor in study and magical research is way too high,
I will be tuning those soon.

--
Rich Skrenta

References

Re: Olympia: opinions on magical research
Bill.Viggers@comp.vuw.ac.nz (Bill Viggers)
Wed, 29 Apr 1992 23:54:00 +0000