Shattered Kingdoms

This thread is devoted to discussing the following questions:
1) Should voodoo be removed from the game?
2) Should voodoo remain in the game, but be nerfed?
3) If voodoo were removed from the game or nerfed, should shamans receive some buff in compensation for this?

This thread is NOT meant to discuss anything specific about WHAT a shaman would receive as a buff if the answer to (3) is yes. Please do not offer any suggestions about what shamans should get instead of voodoo. However, if you feel that voodoo should remain in the game but be nerfed, feel free to state to what extent you feel the spell should be nerfed, but please note that saying "I think voodoo should be nerfed so that it's a completely different spell" is not an option. I will take a moment to outline why it is the opinion of myself and many other players that voodoo, in its current form, should not exist. The 3 things to consider when evaluating a skill or spell are the following: Game-balance, fun, and (in some cases) realism. I think it is obvious that realism has no place in this particular discussion, so I will focus on what voodoo does or does not contribute in terms of game balance and fun.

Reasons for nerfing/removing voodoo from a game-balance perspective:
I will first point out that shamans are a strong class without voodoo. This is demonstrated by the fact that the majority of shamans are not built for voodoo, and do not use voodoo frequently (we will discuss why it is infrequently used later). Shamans have access to the most powerful maledictions in the game, can heal and cure, and are excellent tanks. They can control weather and use call lightning - one of the most effective damaging spells in the game. With spirit horde, they can bash several people and deal damage to them at the same time. They are an extremely versatile class. The class's strengths are not at all reliant on voodoo. With this established, let me try to explain why voodoo is detrimental to the game.

The main problem with voodoo is that there is no reasonable countermeasure. If you are one of the classes that is vulnerable to voodoo, your choices are to sit in a no magic room, wear the one scripted spirit aura item in the game, or continuously quaff spirit aura (which requires an insane amount of brewing). These are not reasonable countermeasures, for obvious reasons. You can give yourself protection, sanctuary, and shield, but if you are a low hp class, these simply won't be enough to save you from a voodoo. For clarification, the classes I consider vulnerable to a single voodoo are: Sorcerer, necromancer, warlock, scout, rogue, bard, priest (in some cases), and hellion (in some cases). Choosing certain races can lower the vulnerability of these classes, but cannot eliminate it.

Another problem is the possibility of double-voodoo. A double-voodoo will kill anyone in the mud, and short of being a shaman or relying on one of the above countermeasures, there's nothing you can do about it. Also, if the shaman uses of a doll, anyone who isn't a shaman (or maybe a halfling merc) or relying on absurd countermeasures is vulnerable to a single voodoo.

Voodoo is often used while the shaman is guarded by many of his allies, and often when the victim and his allies are outnumbered and can not hope to mount a counter-attack. It might sound silly to say that something is OP because it will make it so you die when you are outnumbered by a huge ratio, especially if the argument includes a hypothetical scenario of two shamans double-voodooing you. However, in every other situation where you are outnumbered, you at least have the chance to run away or try to outsmart your opponent with tactics. In this case, you just die without warning. There is no reasonable counter-measure or tactic available to you. It might sound ridiculous to say that it's OP because it causes you to die when outnumbered 4:1 or so, but I consider something OP if there is no countermeasure available to you, and even hiding is not possible.


Reasons for nerfing/removing voodoo from a perspective emphasizing fun:
I mentioned earlier that voodoo is infrequently used. One of the reasons for this is that it requires you to outnumber your opponent by a decent amount - nobody wants to sit around paralyzed without being guarded by a force superior to anything the enemy could muster in response. The other reason for this is that voodoo is universally regarded as "cheap." Many players simply choose not to use the spell unless they are dealing with an extreme circumstance or someone they just REALLY want to grief. This means that voodoo is only used as a way to land a cheap gank against someone who is outnumbered, or it is used as a griefing tool. Neither of these are fun scenarios. There are no tactics involved in sitting in a room being guarded by a dozen of your friends and casting voodoo on someone who has no countermeasures. There is no fun in dying to a spell someone from across Pyrathia cast, when you have no way to react or prevent it from killing you. When you're outnumbered in a usual fight, you can usually hide or use tactics and try to outsmart your opponent in some way. Voodoo makes it so when you are outnumbered, you aren't given a chance. You get a message, and then you're a ghost. This isn't fun.

Considering Objections to my Arguments:
Now, the main response to the above concerns, which I have seen, is an argument something along the lines of: "There are serious drawbacks to voodoo, and casting voodoo puts the caster at extreme risk. This makes its power acceptable." I will now take a moment to explain why I feel this argument fails. Because of the drawbacks, voodoo is only used when an enemy is outnumbered. This means that the shaman is not actually vulnerable. Furthermore, no amount of drawbacks could really make up for the insane amount of power given to the shaman. Even if the shaman is found and killed, that doesn't mean that you weren't ganked, and it won't get you your gear back if your corpse was located by your enemies. You were killed, and there were no reasonable countermeasures you could have taken to prevent it. That's just not fair.

The second response to my concerns goes as follows: "Voodoo is often the only way to deal with a hoarder. We need voodoo to keep hoarders in line." I will now take a moment to explain why I feel this argument comes up short. The worst kind of hoarder is someone who does nothing but keep various powerful items and logs on enough hours to keep from being dehoarded at the end of the month. The undisclosed, often remote location that this player spends his brief time can easily be a no-magic room, making voodoo useless against him. We could also adopt the less strict definition of hoarder as someone who collects powerful and unique items in the game, and then does not participate in pvp, and is impossible to find in the game to roleplay with. There are very few players like this, and even if they are detrimental to the game, the solution isn't to give some of the pbase a command very similar to slay. A counter-measure designed to prevent hoarding shouldn’t be something that drastically affects game-balance for everyone, even when there are no hoarders.

In conclusion:
It is my opinion that voodoo is detrimental to game balance and decreases the amount of fun people have. I think shamans are a strong class that will do just fine without voodoo, but I would not object to them receiving some small buff in compensation for nerfing/removing voodoo. In the spirit of compromise, and because I think there will be lots of neat possible ways of buffing shamans without making them OP, my official vote in this poll is to remove voodoo, and give shamans a compensatory buff. I will also pre-empt any ad hominem attacks by pointing out that I have never been killed with voodoo, and the next character I intend to play will not be one of the classes I listed as vulnerable. It also won't be a shaman.

I voted for the first option.

Shamans are absolutely an excellent class and there is no doubt that they don't need voodoo to, not only be viable, but be absolute beasts. There's little to be added, baldric seems to have covered everything.

I would just like to add that I think we could come up with something better than a, in most cases, one shot kill from anywhere, which can be abused in many ways and used to grief people.

Voodoo is simply not comparable to any other mortal ability, so the only way to judge it is on practicalities, and Baldric captures the issue succinctly.

One thing I do not understand from this though is the disconnect between voodoo being such a sniper rifle and this much-accounted requirement of having a defensive force for voodoo. Using both points at once seems to collapse multiple gameplay scenarios into one anecdotal issue. Is it really proper to render it down to that level? Is this a case of examining something based on its most extreme instance? Is the problem that the only "tactical dialog" opened by voodoo is one not of countermeasures, but instead, of retribution?

I believe the next step would not be to select any of those three options, but instead to find some examples of well-used and enjoyed abilities, so that a baseline of acceptability is established. Tweaking things for being outliers is well and good, but without an established average, we're kind of swinging around the nerfbat blindfolded and hoping to hit the right piñata. For example, it sounds like one of the cornerstones of these complaints is, in fact, how the playerbase has adapted to a previous nerf attempt to the ability; it seems something like voodoo is desired, enough to establish a common strategy for the tactic. It would appear the nerfbat has already missed the target once. So... instead of specific reactions, what of simpler, broader ideals?

Specifically: all else aside for later, is an infinite range attack something that belongs in SK? I think it represents a layer of gameplay that creates a more diverse strategic environment. It would be a shame to just give up on it.

If I were to suppose what makes voodoo annoying, it is that it is one of few attack scenarios in which the defender cannot defend herself into victory. That is to say, in melee, you can kill someone who shoots first. With Voodoo, the best you can do as a defender is stay alive, and then it's on to a new tactical event, one that has been promoted through the lag nerf, but a new event nonetheless.

I voted for 1. I think voodoo is nice, but currently playing a shaman, I have used it twice, once on someone from afar being cheap and griefing all that jazz, then once in the middle of a fight when an enemy was running away I voodooed him and killed him. I would like to see something new to replace Voodoo.

I would be fine if voodoo and final strike just disappeared.

I think voodoo is underutilized and absolutely does not need a nerf. I've never played a shaman to GM and have only ever been on the receiving end of voodoos and I am saying this.

You people on your nerf campaign are soon going to have a game that isn't very fun and casters that get WTFPWNed.

The fact that it's underutilized doesn't mean it requires no nerf.

Secondly, we've already stated, I thought very clearly, that shamans are powerful and do not need voodoo to make them competent and on the even field with other classes.

The voting option I picked clearly states that if voodoo was nerfed or removed shamans would be given something to compensate, so even if nerfing or removing voodoo did nerf shamans (which it wouldn't) they would still receive something in return. In fact, the idea I have for a replacement for voodoo is way cooler than voodoo. However, that is a discussion for another thread.

Lastly, I don't consider anything we're doing as a nerf campaign, it's more of a balancing campaign.

You are correct Jennbo, they are under used because they are generally lame. For the caster and reciever. I would love to see voodoo and final strike replaced with a scry spell.

I am tempted to see what would happen if you could only train it to awful. Would people give up on using it? I wonder if anyone would complain if all the trainers forgot the skill...

I didn't know you had such a sadistic streak, Achernar.