What's new

Inscription circle 7/8 scroll return rates + damage bonus

#1
Inscription feels great. The long bless and buffed reactive armor and magic reflect are really quite nice side-perks.

The return rate on circle 1-6 scrolls feels good, you know you're net spending less on reagents and getting that sweet damage bonus.

The circle 7-8 return rate does not feel so great. In order to get the % damage increase for spells, you're forced to cast off scrolls. Ideally you're spamming Flame Strike which in my experience is the most resource efficient spell to use (proccing the spellbook for free mana back nets you the most and with current info proc rate is the same or better as you increase in circle). However, even at 120 inscription, your chance to not consume the Flame Strike scroll is 96%. So 4% of the time the scroll goes poof.

That means 1/25 chance that you lose 1 Arcane Scroll (~300-500g) + 4 Blanks. Taking the low end of Arcane Scroll costs (really they are closer to 500g now), that's roughly 12.5g per cast of Flame Strike (300 + 12)/25. 2 times higher than casting off regs (6g at vendor price) + using another 30% damage skill (like 120 tracking or something).

This is only true for a 120 scribe. If you're at 100 scribe, the math is bad enough (~60g+ per cast on average) you should likely just cast Energy Bolt.

Consider further increasing the chance to recover or a special character bound scribe crafted item for just the purpose of casting without the Arcane Scroll requirement?
 
Last edited:
#3
hmm im level 56 magery lol but breakpoint would be

100 casts x3gp for regs *2 regs ish is 600gp?
Correct. That's to break even. On the lower circle spells the cast-from-scroll for scribe is significantly more efficient in most cases.

My math was slightly off in the first post, edited it to be accurate. It's still 2x more expensive to cast Flame Strike off scrolls with 120 inscription.

Its 62g per cast on average with GM scribe. Or 10x more expensive.
 
#4
I agree. Currently it makes little sense to take inscription over other damage bonus skills.

The damage bonus should be separated from the requirement of having a scroll. Or just remove arcane scrolls as a reagent for 7th and 8th scrolls. Because the price will only go up as inflation rises and the price of regs is always going to be the same.
 
Last edited:
#5
In order to apply 7th or 8th circle spell to Spellbooks it could require arcane scrolls.

If you want to make scrolls to cast off of then require blank scrolls only if it would stay on par with reag cost?

I don’t know if someone who wants to do the math if that would work better
 
#6
Individual use scrolls should absolutely be craftable, and should not require arcane scrolls. This is something I've been advocating for to Luthius for two months now, so I'm glad to see others are seeing the need as well.
 
#7
I disagree, I love hte requirement of arcane scrolls on level 7 & 8 spell books, it's keeping spell book prices higher, harder to get, and making people all have to work a little harder for them. Without this requirement, there would be thousands of spell books out there, devaluing them for crafters who put the time/effort in farming/buying mats, and crafting them.

I don't even have a full spell book for myself as a scribe! And I think that means hte intent is working.

And honestly, casting your most efficient spell should have a cost to it - you can use regs or you can cast ebolts if you don't have the FS scrolls... The fact that you are burning arcane scrolls if you choose to as a scribe to cast FS, means we are keeping that part of the economy honest...
 
#8
I disagree, I love hte requirement of arcane scrolls on level 7 & 8 spell books, it's keeping spell book prices higher, harder to get, and making people all have to work a little harder for them. Without this requirement, there would be thousands of spell books out there, devaluing them for crafters who put the time/effort in farming/buying mats, and crafting them.

I don't even have a full spell book for myself as a scribe! And I think that means hte intent is working.

And honestly, casting your most efficient spell should have a cost to it - you can use regs or you can cast ebolts if you don't have the FS scrolls... The fact that you are burning arcane scrolls if you choose to as a scribe to cast FS, means we are keeping that part of the economy honest...

I'm not suggesting that all 7th/8th stop requiring arcanes, I'm saying there should be two different kinds of 7th/8th circles: one kind can go in a spellbook and requires arcanes to create. Another kind, we'll call them "single-use scrolls", that do not require arcanes to make, and can only be used to cast because they don't go in spellbooks. Say they use 50 blank scrolls to create.

The problem right now is that arcane scrolls are continuing to increase in cost, to the point that people who rely on inscription for PvM damage are being forced to use 1-6 circle spells to damage monsters. At GM inscription it just isn't viable at the moment to use an average of ~80g (400g * .2) per FS cast to get 25% additional damage on your FS. That's essentially paying 80g for 30 additional damage per 40 mana spell cast. That's absurd.

I barely even cast FS anymore when I'm farming, I just stick with mind blast about 95% of the time.
 
#9
I'm not suggesting that all 7th/8th stop requiring arcanes, I'm saying there should be two different kinds of 7th/8th circles: one kind can go in a spellbook and requires arcanes to create. Another kind, we'll call them "single-use scrolls", that do not require arcanes to make, and can only be used to cast because they don't go in spellbooks. Say they use 50 blank scrolls to create.

The problem right now is that arcane scrolls are continuing to increase in cost, to the point that people who rely on inscription for PvM damage are being forced to use 1-6 circle spells to damage monsters. At GM inscription it just isn't viable at the moment to use an average of ~80g (400g * .2) per FS cast to get 25% additional damage on your FS. That's essentially paying 80g for 30 additional damage per 40 mana spell cast. That's absurd.

I barely even cast FS anymore when I'm farming, I just stick with mind blast about 95% of the time.
Agreed. It's not that I dislike arcane scrolls. I agree they are a great part of the economy and a smart addition.

Forcing scribes to pay a large increasing cost to receive the % damage increase in the skill bonus is silly when other comparable bonuses are free. So tackling that without removing the arcane scroll requirement for spellbooks and what not is ideal.

I find Flame Strike too hard not to cast. I want to optimize the mana returned from aspect pieces and dumping large spells seems better given the info we have for proc rates. Seeing my Flame Strike scroll counter tick down when I do cast it is a little demoralizing right now, especially when I get unlucky and lose 2 scrolls in a row on a mob that drops 500g. :(
 
#10
I see your point now Domnu - missed that in the original read - I'm not against the idea, though I don't feel it's necessary..

In regards to mana return, the mana return is returned a % of the time, so at 25% of the time, 1 in 4 spells you'll return the cost of the spell... 8 EB's cost 160 mana, and you'll be returned twice for 40 mana... 4 FS's cost 160 mana, and you'll be returned once for 40 mana.... What am I missing here?
 
#11
I see your point now Domnu - missed that in the original read - I'm not against the idea, though I don't feel it's necessary..

In regards to mana return, the mana return is returned a % of the time, so at 25% of the time, 1 in 4 spells you'll return the cost of the spell... 8 EB's cost 160 mana, and you'll be returned twice for 40 mana... 4 FS's cost 160 mana, and you'll be returned once for 40 mana.... What am I missing here?
For one, aspect proc rate is scaled based on circle supposedly:
Special Effect Chance (scales based on spell circle): 5% + 0.5% per player Eldritch Tier Level

Flame Strike, in my experience, has a better damage/mana ratio (except on high AR mobs where Mind Blast seems significantly better than both). Your example is reasonable if both spells do the same damage per mana spent but I don't believe that is the case. I'd need to run tests to actually verify for real but thats my gut based on casting a lot of both.
 
#12
I am not underatanding why people think this is unfair. You dont HAVE to use the scrolls to cast flamestrike. If you want the extra damage, pay for the scroll. If not, just cast via regs. Melee characters already function the same way--they can spend money on high end weapons to gain damage, but often opt for cheaper, low or mid range weapons. Can anyone explain?

I guess it probably "feels" worse in the scribe mage context because if you cast flamestrike without scrolls, you are missing out on you inscription damage bonus altogether, but flamestrike is so over-tuned that regular-flamestrike is better than scroll-EB.

That is, currently dps hierarchy is:
Scroll-flamestrike > flamestrike > scroll-EB

...but the dps hierarchy should probably be:
scroll-flamestrike > scroll-EB > flamestrike
 
#13
I am not underatanding why people think this is unfair. You dont HAVE to use the scrolls to cast flamestrike. If you want the extra damage, pay for the scroll. If not, just cast via regs. Melee characters already function the same way--they can spend money on high end weapons to gain damage, but often opt for cheaper, low or mid range weapons. Can anyone explain?

I guess it probably "feels" worse in the scribe mage context because if you cast flamestrike without scrolls, you are missing out on you inscription damage bonus altogether, but flamestrike is so over-tuned that regular-flamestrike is better than scroll-EB.

That is, currently dps hierarchy is:
Scroll-flamestrike > flamestrike > scroll-EB

...but the dps hierarchy should probably be:
scroll-flamestrike > scroll-EB > flamestrike
There's no reason to get inscription for PvM damage when you can just have forensic/tracking/camping and get the same bonus without having to deal with FS spells that cost 500g. The current system for scrolls discourages people from using inscription as a pvp or pvm skill to increase damage for no apparent reason.
 
#14
For one, aspect proc rate is scaled based on circle supposedly:
Special Effect Chance (scales based on spell circle): 5% + 0.5% per player Eldritch Tier Level

Flame Strike, in my experience, has a better damage/mana ratio (except on high AR mobs where Mind Blast seems significantly better than both). Your example is reasonable if both spells do the same damage per mana spent but I don't believe that is the case. I'd need to run tests to actually verify for real but thats my gut based on casting a lot of both.
I believe spell circle only affects the likelihood of the special effect trigger. I don't believe spell circle is factored in to the mana return and spellcharge (150% damage) algorithm.

In my experience FS damage is ~300/40 mana, and MB damage is ~150/14 mana. FS is about 7.5 damage per mana, and MB is about 10.5 damage per mana.

EDIT: As far as aspect trigger probability scaling with circle, that just means that it scales so that if I cast 20 MB (280 mana) I'll end up having roughly the same number of aspect triggers as if I had cast 7 FS (280 mana). Casting FS doesn't increase your overall frequency of aspect special effect triggers. Again: If you're a scribe, there's no reason to do anything other than Mind Blast for spell damage, at the moment.
 
Last edited:
#15
I am not underatanding why people think this is unfair. You dont HAVE to use the scrolls to cast flamestrike. If you want the extra damage, pay for the scroll. If not, just cast via regs. Melee characters already function the same way--they can spend money on high end weapons to gain damage, but often opt for cheaper, low or mid range weapons. Can anyone explain?

I guess it probably "feels" worse in the scribe mage context because if you cast flamestrike without scrolls, you are missing out on you inscription damage bonus altogether, but flamestrike is so over-tuned that regular-flamestrike is better than scroll-EB.

That is, currently dps hierarchy is:
Scroll-flamestrike > flamestrike > scroll-EB

...but the dps hierarchy should probably be:
scroll-flamestrike > scroll-EB > flamestrike
The problem with the comparison is mages already spend gold on magic spell books to get more damage. I carry around a supremely spellbook when I'm not in aspect gear for example. This is completely reasonable and I like that system.

As Domnu pointed out the scroll system is currently just a tax on scribes to get the increased damage % benefit from one of the skills on their template. Other comparable damage boosts don't come with this sort of cost. It's also a significant incentive for PKs/blue looters as you'll be carrying 3-5k in FS scrolls alone if you choose to cast that often. Other similar damage skills don't come with this cost is all.



:thinking:

I'll have to give MB a better test in that case. It would be a bit disappointing if it was better in every scenario. A small sample had it around:
FS: 6 damage/mana
MB: 8.5 damage/mana

The original post is still the same case, even if not spamming it there's no reason it should up the cost to cast by a 2-10x multiplier over regs.
 
#16
I'll have to give MB a better test in that case. It would be a bit disappointing if it was better in every scenario.
I've done pretty extensive testing using the Damage Tracker, and I have not yet found a case where FS is superior to MB. I'm also disappointed, but hopefully this conversation will help prompt some change, because I don't think this is what Luthius/Owyn had in mind for mages.