Where's the fire (damage)??

[stillman]

So it looks like there are only 2 wizard skills that burn the enemies: hydra and (maybe probably) meteor.

Um...did Blizard forget to put in some more fire skills? Lol.

There are alot of great critical hit effect ideas, but something is really missing without the fire spells. I just checked the full wizard trees for the first time today, thinking "I wonder what the critical effect of fire spells will be...destroying the bodies as they burn into ashes? Burning the monsters around a critically hit monster who was set ablaze? Explosion damage? Maybe some little fire sprites bounce off and jump into more enemies? Monsters critically hit with fire run away?"

Idk, it just seems the wizard should have some fire in her belly (and skill trees).

[konfeta]

This is a new character, not a remake of the D1 Sorcerer or the D2 Sorceress. Fire Damage is, simply put, not a focus for the Wizard.

[Frostraven]

The tale of the sorceress' meeting with the Megademons in Uber Tristram has reached far.


No longer will they get slain by creatures immune to all their magics.

[Leugi]

Fire is mostly the mastery of the Witch Doctor now, the Wizard does not care so much for fire as the sorceress did.

[Dendroid King]

If you all were to notice the Wizard's history, she came from the Zann Esu clan which essentially means that she is from the same clan as the Sorceress in Diablo 2. Therefore, she needs to master more fire spells other than Hydra and Meteor Storm. Additional fire spells can be added to the Wizard's arsenal can be fireball, flame strike and warmth.

As for witch doctor mastering fire spells, it would be ridiculous. They are more prone to the arts of dark magics rather than elemental. The fire bomb spell might not really be fire magic but a form of weapon itself.

[konfeta]

If you were to notice the Wizard's history, you would have noticed that she left Zann Esu clan, went to Calledeum as a rebel who managed to learn a bunch of forbidden arcane secrets.

Also, her masteries are Storm, Arcane, Conjuration. Not Elemental, Arcane, Conjuration.

Those wiser than you or I determined long ago that certain schools of magic were too dangerous and forbade their practice. It is those magics that this wizard seems determined to explore – magics centered on manipulating the primal forces from which reality is constructed.

Don't really see any need for fire. Not her style, not her backstory. Primal Magic in form of Storm and Arcane trees, a bunch of typical Vizjerai/Zann Esu spells through Conjuration (Hydra and Meteor come to mind).

[Dendroid King]

Well I agree arcane powers should be the main Wizard skill. However considering that she has been studying in both the Zann Esu clan and the Vizjerai clan for some time, she should have some decent knowledge in elemental spells just like the Sorceress from Diablo 2.

It would be weird as to why among the 3 elements, fire was the least favoured by the Wizard. Its hard to imagine a wizard / sorcerer in the world of Diablo has no access to fireball spell which is perhaps the most common spell among mages.

I m not saying Blizzard is in the wrong direction but this would be something like a barbarian without whirlwind skill. :crazyeyes: Mebbe I will have to get used to it. But certainly its nothing wrong to hope that Blizzard will rename the masteries as elemental, arcane and conjuration powers for the Wizard. :scratchchin:

[Telzen]

Well the wizard has magic missile/Arcane Orb so no real need for fire bolt/fire ball. I'm really hoping that the wizard(and the other classes) get some more active skills though. Doesn't really seem like enough to me the way it is now. Maybe one more active skill per tree at least. And one of them being a never before seen awesome fire spell would be cool.

Edit: Man I had forgot there was a fire ball spell lol, too long since I made a fire sorc I guess.

[NKlint]

On the Barbarian skill tree there was a fifth tier with either no skills or unnamed skills in it. I wonder if this means that there will be 5 tiers per character and the three announced classes along with the unannounced classes will have as many as 28-30 active skills, and 44-45 passive skills.

[melianor]

Well I agree arcane powers should be the main Wizard skill. However considering that she has been studying in both the Zann Esu clan and the Vizjerai clan for some time, she should have some decent knowledge in elemental spells just like the Sorceress from Diablo 2.

It would be weird as to why among the 3 elements, fire was the least favoured by the Wizard. Its hard to imagine a wizard / sorcerer in the world of Diablo has no access to fireball spell which is perhaps the most common spell among mages.

I m not saying Blizzard is in the wrong direction but this would be something like a barbarian without whirlwind skill. :crazyeyes: Mebbe I will have to get used to it. But certainly its nothing wrong to hope that Blizzard will rename the masteries as elemental, arcane and conjuration powers for the Wizard. :scratchchin:

Uhm, the wizard has quite a few Elemental spells?

Lightning:
- Charged Bolt
- Electrocute

Frost:
- Frost Nova
- Ray of Frost
- Blizzard

Fire:
- Disintegrate (okay its in the Arcane tree, but looks pretty high temperature to me)
- Meteor Storm
- Hydra

Arcane/Conjuration:
- Magic Missile
- Spectral Blades
- Tornado

Aside form Tornado that makes 3 spells out of each elemental tree. So that looks pretty equal, no? The rest of the spells are then really more of the arcane and conjuring.

Aside from the fact that this is a new approach, and also considering the quote from konfeta, i think this does not look bad firewise? Also if you look at the Zan Esu tribe and the origins of the sorceresses, there is the mention of Habacalva, who was not told of as castign fireballs but commanding fiery hydras at her bidding!

[Dendroid King]

For lightning, u forgotten to add in the storm armour which made u like a lightning enchanted player and electocute can be upgraded to be become chain lightning by inserting a rune. Therefore there r 4 spells for lightning. I agree with cold = 3 spells. For fire, i disagree that u include disintegrate as it looks more like modern day lasers n also it most likely will be arcane damage. And I seriously doubt that meteor storm n hydra can be upgarded into a different fire spell . :crazyeyes: Mebbe just improved after inserting some runes...

For Habacalva to learn hydras n enchant, she must have also learn fire ball as from Diablo 2, it is a prerequisite to learn hydra n enchant. So I believe she can cast fire balls but she specialize in hydras n enchants. Same goes for Heepsheeba who master in meteor rather than fire balls.

Actually personally I find there r too many passives as compare to active skills. Therefore I want Blizzard to add in more spells for me to nuke and disable spells like telekinesis to return..Hey where is my mana shield???

In conclusion, based on current info still not enuf. Dreaming for Blizz to give me more. :cloud9:

[NKlint]

...

Hey where is my mana shield???

...


I sort of like Stone Skin's functionality than Mana Shield. Stone skin prevents damage up to a point without draining your mana reserve, to me it is superior.

Mana Shield: "% total damage drains mana".
Stone Skin: damage is blocked up to X damage.

Stone Skin is a combination of Bone Armor and Cyclone Armor.

[PetroRabbit]

I agree, I would like to see more selection in Fire based spells. Actually, It would be nice to have a good balance of spells representing each kind of energy. No, the wizard is not the same caster class of d1 or d2. That does not mean they can't use more variety of fire spells which would fit in the conjuration tree.

But as someone else mentioned, there is a 5th tier of skills that have not yet been revealed. Maybe they'll have Firestorm. What would be more forbidden and tempting for the wizard than learning one of Diablo's own spells?

[konfeta]

To be honest, the only Fire Spell that I think the Wizard has so far is Hydra.

Disintegrate is arcane damage. Meteor Swarm looks like physical damage.

Also, your list is missing Arcane Orb (new Fireball) and Wave of Force (which doubles as a Nova-type damage spell).

http://www.diablowiki.net/Arcane_Skill_Tree#Arcane_Orb

[melianor]

Actually i find this discussion about what was in the past and why we don't get it now really fruitless. I'd rather embrace the game they it will be envisioned for us. I have good trust in Blizzard that they will hit the lore and the gameplay just right.

Don't mistake me, i loved/love the Sorceress in Diablo II and i actually never plaid a different class at all. New game, new ways of playing, not repeating what has been plaid for a good many years now. I crave for somethign fresh personally, not the glorification of the good ole D2 days, which i still play from time to time now.

[PetroRabbit]

I respect that you are embracing what blizzard is giving us, and I'm excited as well to try out the new wizard class. The new spells, especially having to deal with arcane, and physical damage through conjuring, already makes the wizard something new. But I would personally like the option of having a balanced set of spells that gives the wizard the option to burn and freeze their enemies also.

There are already enough new options in the trees themselves that it really would not be a glorification of the sorc just to include some fire based magic. Maybe the yet to be revealed 5th tier of skills will have something for some who are fond of a fire caster, w/out having to settle to playing a witchdoctor. As impressive as their fire spells are, they seem more like warlock style demonic spells, rather than a wizard style magic spell.

Personally, it would just be more aesthetically pleasing.

[stillman]

I doubt the WD will be the big time fire user. And SOME one has got to make a big flaming mess all over the place. You know what this means?
...That's right. The archer class will have a ton of fire skills.

Well, maybe, or maybe not. But here is what I think would be nice:
exploding arrow (with huge, no nonsense explosions that fill up 1/3 of the screen and knockback everything).
Firestorm.
Immolition arrow but bigger, messier, and no casting delay.
Arrows that spread hot coals everywhere.
The barb has his ground thumping skills so the archer can shoot the ground and explode it to produce craters and pits of molten lava.
And a chr defining holy fire sort of thing. So the archer could be the holyman and archer in one. It's some sort of demon slayer or demon hunter that takes out the enemies with their own fire. The demons have thier fire used against them sort of deal.

That's my dream anyway. In any case, the archer is going to have to get some powerful AoE skills to match what we've seen with the barb and wizard so far. If the barb gets to have so much AoE in d3, then the archer could very well be the main fire user.

[Telzen]

Fire:
- Disintegrate (okay its in the Arcane tree, but looks pretty high temperature to me)
- Meteor Storm
- Hydra

Disintegrate is like a laser or energy beam, don't really consider that fire. And I wouldn't really consider Meteor Storm fire either so the only wizard skill that actually has fire in it is Hydra. We need some skills that really look like fire.

Edit: Note to self, next time read the whole thread.

[NKlint]

Disintegrate is like a laser or energy beam, don't really consider that fire. And I wouldn't really consider Meteor Storm fire either so the only wizard skill that actually has fire in it is Hydra. We need some skills that really look like fire.

Edit: Note to self, next time read the whole thread.

I agree that Meteor Storm is more physical/concussive damage than it is fire, but Disintegrate as an energy beam in my opinion qualifies as fire. Fire indicates heat, heat indicates energy, fire to energy etc... They're all related. In fact fire is visible thermal radiation created by a volatile chemical reaction, the energy released from fire is what damages someones skin - which is why someone can get burned without actually touching a fire, i.e. a hot pipe, water or steam. So, whether a skill is related to fire or not can be reduced to whether the spell deals in high heat thermal radiation. I think that "fire" spells belong in the arcane tree. Fire isn't a storm, it's not cold... and lightning is the rapid exchange of electrons between a negatively charged ion (cloud) and a positively charged ion (earth).

Anyway, the only reason why it would matter if something dealt fire damage or not dealt fire damage would be what monsters would be resistant to the type of damage being dealt. I can't see Disintegrate doing cold damage, lightning, or poison... and it's not exclusively a Magic damage type, either since an Energy Ray likely would burn whatever it is that it's disintegrating. The term disintegrate itself is a rather broad term anyway since if you were to pull wings off a fly you would technically be disintegrating it. The molecular bonds which hold your average demon would likely be similarly dismantled with whatever manner Blizzard sees fit, as such I don't think that an Energy Ray would be anything but fire. Fire is to heat is to energy is to fire.

[konfeta]

Or, you know, you could read the skill description and see that it deals Arcane Damage. You just killed a small city worth of Catgirls for nothing, you bastard. It's just be a beam of magical energy that rips stuff to shreds without bothering with physics or chemistry.

*Bah, can't resist joining in the Catgirl kill. Energy Ray "being fire damage" - the entire EM spectrum and the concept of thermodynamics would like to have a word with you.

[melianor]

Or, you know, you could read the skill description and see that it deals Arcane Damage. You just killed a small city worth of Catgirls for nothing, you bastard. It's just be a beam of magical energy that rips stuff to shreds without bothering with physics or chemistry.

*Bah, can't resist joining in the Catgirl kill. Energy Ray "being fire damage" - the entire EM spectrum and the concept of thermodynamics would like to have a word with you.

Okay, so no fire damage here. Still i like that "... stuff to shreds without bothering with physics or chemistry ... " part alot. That's actually alot cooler!

Concerning the lore we might want to see some more fire, but i agree with konfeta who said, that the wizard is someone who distances himself from the typical Sorcerer/Sorceress and explores ways that are of the path of the 3 existing schools of magic within the Mage clans.

If you interpret the lore in that way the Wizard might even be eyed as someone who deals in dangerous magic. While he utilizes the elements as well, he delves in an area that surpasses the power of the 3 elements and uses cosmical forces that might be so dangerous, that they could tear the world apart! .... Now i really start liking the Wizard. I think he has a major degree in Quantum Physics! Sure the "normal" sorcerers must think this some kind of dangerous mumbojumbo that should be left alone!

[NKlint]

*Bah, can't resist joining in the Catgirl kill. Energy Ray "being fire damage" - the entire EM spectrum and the concept of thermodynamics would like to have a word with you.

Gee, I happen to have gotten word back from EM spectrum and he might be responsible for the light being red. Thermodynamics said he'd be happy to transfer the radiant heat from the beam to the surrounding tissue from the monsters. Were they saying something different to you?

Furthermore, It was just in my opinion, if you'll read the first sentence in my post you might understand that. I'm assuming you didn't read that part just like you assumed I hadn't already read the description of Disintegrate. Isn't assuming fun?

[konfeta]

but Disintegrate as an energy beam in my opinion qualifies as fire.

Unless my English is filled with more holes than swiss cheese, nothing there pointed out that you did read the description of the spell or that you had any knowledge of its damage type. In fact, this sentence in it current form without supporting corrective (implying the possession of above knowledge) sentences can be easily read as "I think Disintigrate is fire damage." Forgive me for making that mistaken assumption, but you could be a little more clear in the future. Typically one assumes based on information given.


Were they saying something different to you?

Yes. It told me that it was puzzled as to how does one associate a beam of unknown substance, source, and properties with emitting large quantities of radiant heat entirely because it was of red color and a rather unorthodox definition of the word disintegrate (breaking down with heat despite a marked lack of presence of this game's indicator of dangerous temperature, fire damage?).

(this is markedly the most absurd argument I have ever gotten with anyone on a forum)

[Dendroid King]

Actually what Melianor says abt disintegrate = fire spells is logical but unlikely to happen in my opinion considering that spell is in the arcane tree. Actually some of u pointed out that the new wizard should be different as it is a new game. U all are rite. But issit wrong for someone like me to crave for more fire spells? After all, Blizz oredi says that she is sort of an improvement over her predecessor. So I dun see why more basic fire spells like warmth and fireball should not return.

Actually its good that this new wizard specialize in a new field of magic which is arcane. However currently i still feel that there is still lack of arcane n time spells. There r too many passives as compare to active skills. :crazyeyes:

They should add more spells such as force field, invisibility and black hole to make the game more dynamic and fun..

As for stone skin vs mana shield, mana shield is usually better unless stone skin is calculated based on percentage rather than based on numbers. Also it only absorbs physical damage. If mana shield is based on how Diablo 1 work, our new Wizard can be a powerful tank. :scratchchin:

[melianor]

Now, now dear "soon" to be wizards, pleas don't let the heat emitted form desintegrate carry over to your emotions.

I think "... in my opinion ..." is a fair enough statement which does not incorporate facts, since well its an "opinion" and not "facts" ;)

opinion = subjective (can be factual but not implicitly)
fact = objective

[stillman]

While we're on our nerd war here, let me throw in this:

The acid damage counts as "poison". What's up with that?! Poisons are substances that bind to protien receptors, often in cell membranes or even within the cell. They are structually similar to the endogenous molecules that are natually produced with the body. So the posion molecule (like curare for example) gets absorbed into the bloodstream and binds to nicotinic acetylcholine receptors. Thus, the body's acetylcholine can't bind to as many receptors so action potentials in neurons are inhibited. With cyanide, the binding is within the cell's citric acid cycle to an enzyme that normally completes synthesis of adenine triphosphate. Thus, cyanide prevents the cell from producing most of it's energy. With heavy metal posionings, the metals bind non-competitively (irreversibly) to enzymes which renders the enzymes non-functional. So waste products don't get cleaved and degraded by the enzymes, and wastes build up causing toxicity.

Acids are much different. Sure, posions may have some lower PH value making some of them slightly acidic, but they are certainly not damaging in the way a strong acid would be. For instance, ethanol alcohol has a PH that makes it VERY slightly acidic. But it's acidity is along the lines of water's acidity. It's damaging effects can be from poisoning, certainly not from it's acidic properties.

Acids can be considered free protons in a solution, or more realistically, H3O molecules that carry a net positive charge. Acids are proton donating substances that yield the H3O in solution. The positivley charged H3O attracts electrons from other substances. Since chemical reactions are the result of valence electron transfer between atoms and molecules, the acids would do damage by turning one substance into another.

The main difference is posions won't do anything until they are absorbed somehow. Strong acids will do damage through contact alone.

Anyway, I think the arcane ray thing is acceptable as arcane damage since they can just say arcane damage counts as whatever they want it to. But acid cloud counting as posion damage is just unacceptable.

They should make acid a new damage form and resist for d3. There's all kinds of acid attacks that would be great: acid rain, holy water (maybe), spitting acid (like the dogs in d1), enemies that bleed out puddles of acidic gastric juices, etc.

[NKlint]

(this is markedly the most absurd argument I have ever gotten with anyone on a forum)

I could say the same thing, since it's you who initiated the argument while I was only stating my opinion. You seem to be fishing for any excuse you can use to tell people off, even one as benign as "I think Disintegrate qualifies as fire" as if I broke the "konfeta rules of conduct" maybe you need to make your own forum and assault people there when they make a post that threatens your ideas or you could take a nap.

[melianor]

No flaming on either side or this thread will be disintegrated. Got a behavioral problem? Report it!

[konfeta]

I could say the same thing, since it's you who initiated the argument while I was only stating my opinion.

The "absurd argument" statement implied that both parties are at fault - it implicates me of guilt no less than anyone. Taking that as a personal attack does you no credit. And please, try to address the actual points in posts instead of cranking up the hostility meter because your feelings were offended by reading something that disagreed with you.

Notice how you were the one who turned the argument into actual flaming. I won't deny that I was using patronizing language (I shouldn't have, and I apologize), but that's not an excuse for you to explode into a tantrum if you wish to have any semblance of a moral high ground (something that should be irrelevant here in the first place).

"You seem to be fishing for any excuse you can use to tell people off"

Am I not allowed to post replies that disagree with opinions of others? Am I not allowed to make assumptions based on information people actually give in their posts? Am I not allowed to attempt to correct what I perceive to be other people's misinformation or mistakes?

Your post indicated lack of understanding of what Disintegrate of D3 was; saying "Disintegrate as an energy beam in my opinion qualifies as fire" does not automatically absolve you from making a post that fails to differentiate between showing what you know and showing what you think something should be.

I replied in what I thought was joking manner (granted, I should have used less patronizing language than that), you answered in righteous indignation as if I came out and said "LULZ UR OPINION IS TRASH."

I explained my comment; you ignored whatever arguments I presented and made a post that was nothing more than a personal attack.

Now, I am not going to claim I am anywhere close to being a model of a decent poster/person who has both patience and wisdom-fueled understanding of all things worldly, but I *will* attempt to address anything I perceive as an absurd or misinformed argument with hostility if that argument was presented with any form of hostility or willful ignorance in the first place.

In this case, I perceived misinformation on your part and attempted to correct it. I shouldn't have made my first reply to your post the way I did (*Bah, can't resist joining in the Catgirl kill. Energy Ray "being fire damage" - the entire EM spectrum and the concept of thermodynamics would like to have a word with you was an astoundingly poor choice of wording), I apologize, but please, don't act all high and mighty after your tantrum of a response.

[Fegon]

While we're on our nerd war here, let me throw in this:
The acid damage counts as "poison". What's up with that?!

Yes! This has always bothered me to.

[Gigashadow]

All I can say is: fireballs are boring.

[stillman]

They don't need to be. The d1 and d2 fireballs were really boring, with the petty range. And the d2 fireball cheap animation disipated so fast you hardly had a chance to see the fire. It was justa flash of light.

But in d3, they could make fireballs blast away half the screen, causing things to explode with the physix thing their using. Some soot, craters, black smoke, burning corpses, and lots of knockback would make things a lot less boring.

[Gigashadow]

It's still a fireball, and still boring. Fireballs in Nox did all that you described but they were still boring (compared to all the other spells) because of the concept of a flaming ball being so incredibly old.

I don't care if they are in the game, I am just saying I won't miss them.

[Leugi]

But in d3, they could make fireballs blast away half the screen, causing things to explode with the physix thing their using. Some soot, craters, black smoke, burning corpses, and lots of knockback would make things a lot less boring.

Not only would that be boring, but also terribly exaggerated kid, I wouldn't like seeing such a spell on D3

[stillman]

I don't think it's exaggerated at all. Explosions leave behind all of those consequences I mentioned; craters, smoke, force, soot, etc.

[Leugi]

Yep, but not half of the screen, it would just kill the whole gameplay, and it would have to be some kind of huge fire ball, so not the classical fire ball which is still boring :)

[Apocalypse]

Yep, but not half of the screen, it would just kill the whole gameplay, and it would have to be some kind of huge fire ball, so not the classical fire ball which is still boring :)


i thought meteor was kinda the new age fireball, i just hated using it myself lol. i will be fine with no fireball in game but it does seem to be a staple of any mage like character

[melianor]

Well the "staple" spell in this case is "Mage Missile". The skill setup is in my opinion heavily oriented around D&D and there Magic Missile is something of a staple starter spell, if i remember right?

[Gigashadow]

No, it's not the starter spell in DnD, it is, though, a starter spell in Nox. In DnD you usually start with some worse spells and Magic Missile is level 2 or something...

[konfeta]

Your Firaball is now called Arcane Ball. Same explosion except purple.

[stillman]

Well the "staple" spell in this case is "Mage Missile". The skill setup is in my opinion heavily oriented around D&D and there Magic Missile is something of a staple starter spell, if i remember right?

My old friends who were really into D&D said that magic missile is basically the D&D mage's attack. The fighter has his weapon attack, and the mage has magic missiles. There are huge differences of course, but both represent some of the most common ways of dealing damage in D&D. So in that regard, it is really is a staple for the mage.

[Gigashadow]

To konfeta
Non-fire damage. In the context of immunes, that's a big difference. But basically it is the same thing.