Why does the spells not work well?

[Dire_Wolf]

Vulnerability, Enfeeble and Stun are spells that weaken a monster or opponent. They weaken defence, strength and attack by 10%. Now i have tried to come up with a better way to kill Mithril dragons.

 

First i thought of specing fast with Statius warhammer spec each mithril dragon, trying to use 10 secs to spec each time. But someone told me that if you get attacked or something, it automatically burns off 1 minute of the 60minutes a Statius warhammer has. Another poster backed this up by saying i would get 60 kills for 60 mins.

 

Now i thought then "Chaotic staff+Vulnerability to weaken defence of Miths by 10%!". I went and looked at Chaotic staffs attack bonus and it was a lousy +17 magic attack bonus. So that plan won't work.

 

I then went to see how much i would splash/succeed with spell. It didn't look good. I thought then "What if i have a partner who weakens all mithril dragons for me! Lootsharing them?!". So i went back with 90+ magic attack bonus, only to find out that i splashed often.

 

Now my question is: Why do these spells exist if they aren't used for their purpose? It's stupid. By time i weaken a mithril, i could have dealt 100+ damage, nearly half of Miths life!

Short said: The weakening spells Vulnerability, Enfeeble and Stun are inefficient. They splash even with decent magic attack bonus, and this sucks. I have never heard someone mention in a guide or something "Use weakening spell X".

[Obtaurian]

They splash on miths because miths have high magic defense. The same goes for just about any monster you'd want to use such a spell on. If a boss ever comes out that's weak to both magic and melee, and melee is more effective on it for whatever reason, then it might be a little bit feasible to have someone use the defense-lowering spell. Seems like a very specific situation to hope for.

[Dire_Wolf]

They splash on miths because miths have high magic defense. The same goes for just about any monster you'd want to use such a spell on. If a boss ever comes out that's weak to both magic and melee, and melee is more effective on it for whatever, then it might be a little bit feasible to have someone use the defense-lowering spell. Seems like a very specific situation to hope for.

Again i know they have high magical defense. But Jagex should make a exception with weakening spells. They are not being used at all. Only purpose they have is for splash magic lvling.

 

Imagine how nice it will be to be able to use these spells and not actually splash! And here is a formula or whatever you'd call it:

with no magic attack bonus you have 90% chance of succeeding to weaken a monster. And if you have +50 magic attack bonus, you will be guranteed to weaken a monster each time u cast a spell.

 

That "formula" is just a example of how it can be dealt with.

[LitterBug]

They splash on miths because miths have high magic defense. The same goes for just about any monster you'd want to use such a spell on. If a boss ever comes out that's weak to both magic and melee, and melee is more effective on it for whatever, then it might be a little bit feasible to have someone use the defense-lowering spell. Seems like a very specific situation to hope for.

Again i know they have high magical defense. But Jagex should make a exception with weakening spells. They are not being used at all. Only purpose they have is for splash magic lvling.

 

Imagine how nice it will be to be able to use these spells and not actually splash! And here is a formula or whatever you'd call it:

with no magic attack bonus you have 90% chance of succeeding to weaken a monster. And if you have +50 magic attack bonus, you will be guranteed to weaken a monster each time u cast a spell.

 

That "formula" is just a example of how it can be dealt with.

 

That would be pretty op. Everybody would just bring runes for those spells and cast it.

Basically - you have to choose, do you want to go melee / magic / range.

If you can always choose between multiple combat stances - then there would be no triangle would there?

 

It's a pretty fair thing, mages can cast it and it'll be successful more often but because they're already using magic.

 

EDIT:

Your question is like saying - "Why does the Fire Blast spell not work well when I'm melee-ing? It splashes pretty often so they might as well just take it out of the game"

That wouldn't make much sense would it?

[Dire_Wolf]

That would be pretty op. Everybody would just bring runes for those spells and cast it.

Basically - you have to choose, do you want to go melee / magic / range.

If you can always choose between multiple combat stances - then there would be no triangle would there?

 

It's a pretty fair thing, mages can cast it and it'll be successful more often but because they're already using magic.

 

EDIT:

Your question is like saying - "Why does the Fire Blast spell not work well when I'm melee-ing? It splashes pretty often so they might as well just take it out of the game"

That wouldn't make much sense would it?

In Runescape there is no "I am a Warrior or Meleer" or "I am archer" or "I am mager". Everyone does all of them! So why should this be any different?

 

And if you want to keep success rate of weakening spells to players who are gonna mage, then how about this:

For every 1 magic attack bonus you have, it will mean 1% success rate when casting weakening spells. So if you have 100 magic attack bonus, it will be guranteed success.

 

The point is to make the weakening spells worth using in PvM in particular.

 

And no my question is not like "Why does the Fire Blast spell not work well when I'm melee-ing? It splashes pretty often so they might as well just take it out of the game".

 

Because i wore magic equipment with 90 + magic attack bonus and cast the weaken spells and splashed. Also i am not suggesting to remove the spells, but make them worth using. What's point of these spells if people only use them to splash train magic?

[LitterBug]

It's not any different.

You can be a melee/range/mage but not all at the same time.

 

I'm sure you don't train range with a full set of rune/dragon on. It's just not viable - you try to maximize your damage output by putting on gear that increases it not decrease it.

 

Additionally, monsters have innate resistance too - there's a reason why greater demons are easier to kill then fire giants despite the level difference.

Also, magic resistance depends not only on your gear but your level and magic level as well - I'm sure this is the case with mithril dragons. Since they can't actually have a level, I'm sure Jagex incorporated their actual combat (which is pretty damn high) into factoring how hard/often you hit for.

[Dire_Wolf]

It's not any different.

You can be a melee/range/mage but not all at the same time.

 

I'm sure you don't train range with a full set of rune/dragon on. It's just not viable - you try to maximize your damage output by putting on gear that increases it not decrease it.

 

Additionally, monsters have innate resistance too - there's a reason why greater demons are easier to kill then fire giants despite the level difference.

Also, magic resistance depends not only on your gear but your level and magic level as well - I'm sure this is the case with mithril dragons. Since they can't actually have a level, I'm sure Jagex incorporated their actual combat (which is pretty damn high) into factoring how hard/often you hit for.

When i went with magic equipment to use Vulnerability on Mithrils i was ONLY Mage, yet spells splashed. I am also level 99 Magic.

 

And yes monsters have defence/ressistance. But it's a dilemma you know?

 

Low level monsters are easy to weaken, but also very easy to kill. So a weakening spell is no good on them.

 

While High levels monsters are good targets for weakening spells, but they have so high ressistance. And even with good level and magic attack bonus, you still don't have great chance of success.

[LitterBug]

^^

 

It just seems like in most of the cases - melee is always the best option to choose when fighting a monster.

Especially if the monster is at your level or high - otherwise half of the equipment of mages/rangers are made useless.

 

It just seems like they need to rehaul the classes, start balancing out some of the things.

I can understand part of it, because especially if you're using magic/range - you can safe spot and not even get hurt whereas if you're melee - it's a lot harder to not get hit.

It's a moot point with higher level monsters because they have multiple attack styles but short of a pretty huge class overhaul - there's nothing that can be done.

 

I'm just glad I'm not f2p anymore - where magic/range was pretty much useless compared to melee.

[Dire_Wolf]

^^

there's nothing that can be done.

Actually Jagex can make exception with weakening spells. For example they could make it so that you get higher percentage success at performing a weakening spell. And you would get 1% for 1 magic attack bonus, and 100 magic attack bonus would be 100% spell perform success.

 

OR a similar approach.

 

This would benefit mages. How this should be in PvP is not relevant because it's should be aimed at monsters.

[LitterBug]

I wasn't referring to PvP situations.

 

In 90% of the case - the best melee set up would always be better then the best range/mage set up.

I was just saying that it's almost always easier just to melee then to do range/mage.

 

I think that casting stat changing spells should be revamped not only to include magic attack but also defense.

It's not fair if you're going to stun a lvl 300 dragon just as easily as a lvl 1 rat.

[Dire_Wolf]

I wasn't referring to PvP situations.

 

In 90% of the case - the best melee set up would always be better then the best range/mage set up.

I was just saying that it's almost always easier just to melee then to do range/mage.

 

I think that casting stat changing spells should be revamped not only to include magic attack but also defense.

It's not fair if you're going to stun a lvl 300 dragon just as easily as a lvl 1 rat.

Melee being better than range/magic is not relevant to me. And may i remind you? Runescape is about using all three forms of combat. Not just one of them. So that you shouldn¨'t use a magic weakening spell while meleeing don't make sense. This topic aint about discussing which combat form is better than other. If you ask me, the three of them are pretty good except for magic. Now lets end that there and go on to the topic:

 

How is my suggestion of 1 magic attack bonus= 1% spell performing success ONLY FOR weakening spells a bad way to go? This means you need magical equipment to achieve +100 magic attack bonus to always be able to weaken a high level monster without splashing.

 

Now, its stupid that one would weaken a level 1 rat. Or a level 100 greater demon. Whats the point of casting a weaken spell on them? They are very weak as it is. However casting weakening spells on a high level monster is better. This way the spell serves its purpose. And how is it not fair for someone to be able to weaken a high level monster without splashing once, if they bring magical equipment to get 100 magic attack bonus?

 

Is it better that weakening spells continue to splash and noone using them for their true purpose? Or should Jagex work on making them useful.

[LitterBug]

I wasn't referring to PvP situations.

 

In 90% of the case - the best melee set up would always be better then the best range/mage set up.

I was just saying that it's almost always easier just to melee then to do range/mage.

 

I think that casting stat changing spells should be revamped not only to include magic attack but also defense.

It's not fair if you're going to stun a lvl 300 dragon just as easily as a lvl 1 rat.

Melee being better than range/magic is not relevant to me. And may i remind you? Runescape is about using all three forms of combat. Not just one of them. So that you shouldn¨'t use a magic weakening spell while meleeing don't make sense. This topic aint about discussing which combat form is better than other. If you ask me, the three of them are pretty good except for magic. Now lets end that there and go on to the topic:

 

How is my suggestion of 1 magic attack bonus= 1% spell performing success ONLY FOR weakening spells a bad way to go? This means you need magical equipment to achieve +100 magic attack bonus to always be able to weaken a high level monster without splashing.

 

Now, its stupid that one would weaken a level 1 rat. Or a level 100 greater demon. Whats the point of casting a weaken spell on them? They are very weak as it is. However casting weakening spells on a high level monster is better. This way the spell serves its purpose. And how is it not fair for someone to be able to weaken a high level monster without splashing once, if they bring magical equipment to get 100 magic attack bonus?

 

Is it better that weakening spells continue to splash and noone using them for their true purpose? Or should Jagex work on making them useful.

 

Do you even think before you talk?

I'm not saying only use one form of combat - I'm saying you can't use multiple forms of combat at the same time.

Casting magic when you're in full melee armor is paramount to ranging with full melee armor - it's not going to work out.

 

It seems that whatever anybody else says, you're still going to qq about how you can't use weaken spells on high leveled monsters and propose downright dumb ideas for spells to work.

Why would anybody train/wear any type of defensive armor if you can just get your bonus up to 100 and never miss regardless of what their defensive stats are.

 

It's like you're not even here to have an actual conversation - you just want to rant and have things your way without thinking of any consequences.

Have fun with that, I'm outtie.

[Obtaurian]

It's like you're not even here to have an actual conversation - you just want to rant and have things your way without thinking of any consequences.

Have fun with that, I'm outtie.

 

A pretty good summary of every rant he's ever posted. Not worth arguing with him. Clearly we should be able to have near 100% accuracy in full melee gear. :rolleyes:

[Dire_Wolf]

Do you even think before you talk?

I'm not saying only use one form of combat - I'm saying you can't use multiple forms of combat at the same time.

Casting magic when you're in full melee armor is paramount to ranging with full melee armor - it's not going to work out.

 

It seems that whatever anybody else says, you're still going to qq about how you can't use weaken spells on high leveled monsters and propose downright dumb ideas for spells to work.

Why would anybody train/wear any type of defensive armor if you can just get your bonus up to 100 and never miss regardless of what their defensive stats are.

 

It's like you're not even here to have an actual conversation - you just want to rant and have things your way without thinking of any consequences.

Have fun with that, I'm outtie.

It looks like your not reading what i am TYPING...i have suggested that casting weakening magic should be more successful WITH magic offensive equipment. And it seems you've misunderstood, all weakening spells weakens a monster up to 10% of their defence, str or attack depending on which spell. So its 10% of defence gone for high level monsters, not ALL of their defence. So you will still hit 0s.

 

And let's say that my idea got released ok? Then in order to use vulnerability at Mithril dragon, you will need to wear Ahrims robe and top. And you know what that will do? You will get damaged more by Mithrils than if you wore Black d hide or Karil. And you would only have 52 magic attack bonus, so you would have 52% weakening spell perform success.

 

Even with that, you would still splash. just not as much. You talk about my way and that i don't think of the consequences. Ok, lets look at your way and my way.

 

Your way:

Your against Jagex working on finding a way to make weakening spells worth using. This means weakening spells will still be crap to use and only useful for splash magic training.

 

My way:

I am for Jagex working on finding a way to make these spells work better. If it is to be a Mage only benefit, then so be it. I am just saying they should work on fixing these spells, so that people can actually use them and not waste loads time splashing.

 

A pretty good summary of every rant he's ever posted. Not worth arguing with him. Clearly we should be able to have near 100% accuracy in full melee gear. :rolleyes:

I can assure you that with even overwhelming attack bonus/accuracy with melee, i hit 0s on Chickens, men/woman and guards now and then. And how exactly will 10% weakening of Mithril dragons defence make you achieve 100% accuracy?

 

Let me repeat, even if Mithrils had same defence as a bloodveld, greater demon or other weak monster, no matter what i would still hit 0 damages on them now and then. So your wrong, its not possible to achieve 100% accuracy in Runescape.