Arelith

Description of Bug Experienced:
Deafening clang doesn't work with temporal essence.

Steps to reproduce the Bug:
Use character able to cast Deafening clang (Paladin 30 in my case)
Cast on any weapon
Use any temporary (non-sonic) essence on the same weapon

(Additionally you can cast another deafening clang on the same weapon and the temporary essence stop functioning)

Expected Result:
Non-restricted spell shouldn't be rendered useless by temporary essence and weapon supposed to do:
1. Sonic damage from deafening clang
2. Damage from temporary essence

(Additionally temporary essence shouldn't be rendered null by non-restricted spell)

Actual Result:
Temporary essence / deafening clang overwrites each other, which renders one of them useless

Additional Information/Notes
I expect putting deafening clang as an property instead of temporary damage could solve the problem.

Personally I don't think the interaction between temporary essences and deafening clang should change. It'd be too much free damage.

Kalopsia wrote: Tue Feb 01, 2022 1:26 pm Personally I don't think the interaction between temporary essences and deafening clang should change. It'd be too much free damage.

What is the reason of the round/lvl spell for clerics that gain it as domain spell, when it's overshadowed by sonic essence? Increase the duration for clerics as well in that case, so it feels like they are actually getting something? Because if the interaction stays like that no cleric will ever spend another half round to cast that when they can have long duration temp essence with sonic on weapon.

And mind you that paladins got gutted of their 5 magic DMG from favor. If they had that, I would completely agree with you on that, but since they got rid of that, and deafening is still element that can be dealt with by def essences and anti-elemental spells....

Sonic is one of the top tier damage types.
So much so that it becomes this in order of precedence:
Magic
Divine
Positive
Sonic
Anything else

Magic damage is hard to balance around due to the general lack of immunity to it, taking this away but consequently reducing Paladin windup time is a fine exchange given they now get a useful smite.

As for making clang last longer, Clerics get a suite of tools simply not available to Paladins in the form of a 1 to 9 spellbook.
If we give yet another Paladin special feature to Cleric, why play a Paladin when you can just be a militant Cleric with practically the same abilities and then some?

Further:
Deafening Clang: Not restricted. Duration increased to turns per level when cast via Paladins spell slot. The damage component now instead deals 1 of Sonic damage at level 1. 2 at 7, and increases by +1 every 4 levels thereafter, capping at 7 of damage.

1, 7, 11, 15, 19, 23, 27 for 7 damage.
Means even Clerics get 6 or 7 damage in almost all cases, against a +4 or 1d6 (average 3.5, 7 crit) essence you come out ahead and reliably so.


So for this case:
Not a bug, intended design.
Stacking damage is scary and we are mindful of this.

Okay. But I will have some questions.

1. How would you argument the sonic is top tier damage type?
For once I don't see difference between elec and sonic. Defensive essence, Epic/energy resistance and the resist elements line of spells works the same. Is there something I am missing?
2. "Deafening Clang: Not restricted." I see this as a big restriction. Casting the spell actually making another bonus void. And my point is not for change, but for it is missleading description. Description on wiki says "The spells that are not restricted can be used freely in any weapon and stacked with one another and even one restricted buff."
3. "Clerics get 6 or 7 damage in almost all cases, against a +4 or 1d6 (average 3.5, 7 crit)" Which means that cast of the spell gives 3.5 at best (and 2 at worst) damage, which doesn't seem to be that shattering to be locked behind round spell.
4. "Not a bug, intended design." and "we are mindful of this" If that is intended and you are mindful of it, it would be nice for even players to know. I haven't found one word in game or even wiki description of the spell, that would imply such.

Point is, if it supposed to work that way, it would be good, if it is also described like this (spell desc, wiki).
Also I found one older post, where this issue was adressed, but no answer given. (viewtopic.php?f=12&t=35150)