Alright, I had a few things I was milling over. I love spell-casting and feel like it greatly enhances the thematic quality of the game. Having said that, as everyone knows, there are just a lot of crappy spells. I know many people just trim the deck down, but I don't think that's the solution for me. I would much much rather make some changes to some specific spells to make them more useful and/or enjoyable.

The main issue I've encountered is that you really can't make sweeping changes to the core spell-casting mechanics because all of the spells are balanced differently and many are mechanical... oddities you might say. In short, making broad changes creates a lot of balance issues. I kind of wanted to get peoples' opinions on where the biggest problem areas lie. So far, these are the things I'm thinking of.

1. Combat spells are universally overpriced. Shriveling is decent. Whither is debatable, but Dread Curse I strongly feel is not balanced well with Shrivel - it has a higher sanity cost, a lower casting modifier, and is 2 handed and only an additional +3. It should really give you at least a +10. Spectral Razor and Fist of Yog-Sothoth are perhaps the 2 single worst spells in the game. I mean really, 2 hands and 2 sanity for an average of +4 combat modifier? That's ridiculously weak. I don't know if I want to get rid of these spells altogether or just retool them somehow. I like Storm of Spirits, though I kind of think it should have a sanity cost and give you a higher bonus (1 and +5 perhaps). Summon monster should give you a modest circumstantial bonus (like +1 to horror/evade, and + 2 combat checks) against the monster you summoned because, after all, you summoned it and I don't get what the point is otherwise. Call Down the Storm is cool, I can't decide if it should be +3 or if +2 is appropriate. Azure Flame is neat-o, and essentially a magic shotgun- but considering the maintenance price it's a tad weak. It should give you like a +6. Again, Steal Life is cool but a little weak to require 2 hands (although in this case I think it should just be one-handed instead of having a higher modifier).

2. I don't like "Cast and discard" spells - I feel like discarding a spell after one use is sort of conceptually weird and not very fun. I think I'm going to rule that all "cast and discard" spells become "cast and exhaust" and have their casting modifiers reduced by 2. I realize some of these spells are very powerful- but really, there should be more spells that are on a level with Find Gate, IMO, and for most of them you'd be taking a rather large risk of paying 2 sanity and nothing happening.

3. There's no good reason why you should only be able to draw 2 spells at the magic shop when you can draw 3 at the other stores. I've ruled that (since I use most expansion cards), all shops let you draw 4 cards - I find this makes visiting the magic shop a bit more attractive.

4. Daisy's (and Dexter's/Harvey's PS) really should only let you reduce 1 sanity cost per round and not period. If I'm beefing up spells, I'm absolutely going to house rule this one, because the way it is makes Daisy far too good relative to other spell-casters, and has a lot of wonky in-game effects (like getting 2 shrivelings and a +12 combat modifier with no sanity cost but still having to pay 1 for a +9 from Dread Curse). I feel like if the spells had more appropriate power levels, this would be very balanced.

Thoughts? Feedback?

Tibs said:

1. The problem is that many spells are too conditional. Dread Curse should only have a sanity cost of 1. Why? Because it would be the exact same cost/benefit of Shriveling + Wither, except it has a worse casting modifier to compensate for the fact that you're only making one. It already has the added drawback of being 2 handed and having a lower casting modifier, giving it a higher sanity cost in addition for only a bit more power is excessive. It's why most people consider Shrivelling well balanced but consider Dread Curse kinda gimped. IMO, 2 sanity should be reserved for spells that have more far-reaching effects than helping you kill a single monster.

2. With Greater Banishment, it's possible. With most of the other "cast and discard" spells, I think they would be perfectly well balanced with a -2 casting modifier in place of being discarded. Again, most of them have a 2 sanity cost and with a -4 modifier you run a high risk of paying 2 sanity for nothing, these spells would only be good in the hands of the best spellcasters. Several of these spells (like Astral Travel and Bless) are overpriced for the fact that they're "cast and discard" anyway. This may not be a fit-all solution, I'll admit, and it may require some individual tweaking of some of the spells.

3. I don't see any problem with letting 4 cards be drawn when you're using all expansion content as the decks are twice as large and heavily diluted.

4. I agree I suppose.

Tibs said:

As long as we're talking about hypotheticals, the Curiositie Shop, General Store, Magick Shoppe, and Admin Building should all work the same. For each, you should draw three and buy one. And spells and skills should have variable prices, depending on how good they are, just like common and unique items. Also skills are a tad overpriced.

I must agree with the original poster. Spells aren't all that great.

Use a gun or a magic sword and you only have to make one check (the combat check). Use a spell and you have to make two (the spell check and the combat check). Use a gun or a magic sword and you don't lose Sanity (Powder of Ibn Ghazi aside) Use a spell too often and it's a trip to the cuckoo farm for you. Sure, spells are great against LLiogor, but that's what... one monster in one hundred? Hardly a solid reason for investing in spells.

My recommendation are that:

1. The Magic Shoppe needs to be bumped up.
2. The deck should be pruned - one copy of every spell except Heal , Cloud Memory , Find Gate and the combat spells.
3. Spells should only cost Sanity when you successfully cast them.

avec said:

Agreed. When MH comes out and we get to see how Institutions work (and if SE is updated) I'd be very tempted to make an institution called the Arkham Chamber of Commerce with effects such as:

1. Reducing all costs by $1 (min $1)
2. Removing all Tasks and Missions from the deck and making them available from the start.
3. Bumping all "sales" locations to draw three things
4. Add an Egyptian Shop to the Merchant District for Exhibit Items.
5. Putting Velma's Gratitude into play from the beginning.

Jake yet again said:

I think they are deliberately meant to be weak and/or unreliable + likely to reduce sanity (whether sucessful or not) as a thematic part of the game. In my opinion they don't need to be improved.

Shub-Niggurath said:

I actually believe this statement is objectively wrong. Lovecraftian spell-casting is powerful but costly. It's fairly obvious that the game thinks that spells are more valuable/powerful than they actually are in practice. The developers have also explicitly admitted that they weren't terribly happy with how spellcasting ended up in the game and that it would be revised if core rules were ever revisited. The real problem is that too many balancers were thrown and many of the spells in the game have their usefulness compromised by too many mitigating factors. The sanity cost for many spells is inflated. Considering how easy it is to lose sanity from various sources, 2 sanity is too much to pay for 90% of the spells and should be reserved for only the most powerful ones like Greater Banishment. Fist of Yog-Sothtoth and Spectral Razor should cost 0 and 1 sanity respectively, instead of 1 and 2, because they will rarely give you larger modifiers than Wither and Shriveling get. Probably about 25% of the spells have a higher sanity cost than is necessary for their power level. It's so bad that even investigators that have amazing spell-related abilities generally under-perform.

Roughly 40% of the spells in the game are pretty good as-is, and about 60% of them under-perform for some reason or another. That is a bit ridiculous. Even though there are a few weak items in the other decks, they are generally cheap and are still usable. I actually decided to go through and look at every individual spell, compare its power level to the other item decks, and ended up modifying roughly half of them, slightly more probably. I'll post them on here for evaluation/feedback later on.

Einlanzer80 said:

Hmmm... That'd make for an interesting guardian... One that reduces the sanity cost of a whole list of spells.

You might be interested in this thread, which I reanimated from the old forums

http://web.archive.org/web/20080423061407/www.fantasyflightgames.com/ffgforums/posts/list/112.page

It takes an ice age to load, but it contains gems like these:

Denying the Ancient One

Ohhh can I really pay a sanity for that? No.. you cant because we removed all these spells. This spell just doesn't cut it..
(remove all for Hard Cut, leave 1 for others)

Premonition

It costs 1 sanity to focus 2 at any time. Ummm no..
(Cut all, and then tear them up)

Astral Travel

A good spell for gate closers. Fun when you get this spell, find gate and a gate box...
(keep all)

Feeding the Mind

Another nasty combo type card that can match up well with other items or abilities that give you back stamina. I guess this is where your heal spell could be fun....
(Hard cut decks could take out 1, other decks just leave them in)

That's MillMaster, isn't it? I wonder what became of him.

Spells are only resisted by magic. Far more monsters have some form of physicall protection. It is generally pretty easy to get spells. Many encounters offer them. Far more than items or unique items.

I have no idea what you are going on about with the Fist of Yog-Sothoth. +per success rolled durring the casting check? That can, and has, gotten pretty redicoulous. Does it match the Braizer of Souls no, but the Brazier is harder to find than a spell? The items are not all balanced against each other.

This is very much a game of use what you got when you got it. If you want to stack the spell or item decks in your favor, don't complain when it gets too easy. This is a game of making it through no matter the cost. Even your sanity.

I dunno, my two cents.

Tibs said:

Obviously he was eaten by an Elder God as a reward for all his hard work.

LordZon said:

Well... I agree with you regarding making do with what you have, but if this were to be made into a guardian, it could be fun for occasional use (particularly if the herald and ancient one selected were especially horrific).

Another thought is instead of reducing sanity costs, combat spells could have a rounded down by 2/3rds effect against magical immunity. I'm not sure that that would be too unbalancing for combat, thoughts? Perhaps a +3 cap for spell bonuses could also be set (to keep it from going overboard).

LordZon said:

It doesn't change the fact that the spell deck is noticeably inferior to the unique item deck. Fist of Yog-sothoth is terrible, it gives a +2 casting modifier so on average you will get 6ish dice, which you will rarely get more than 2 successes on and even that isn't guaranteed. The vast majority of the time it is comparable to wither, and will only match shrivelling if you are very, very lucky. It is a very terrible and overpriced spell, as is Spectral Razor. They should had a sanity cost of 0 and 1 respectively instead of 1 and 2.

I think some sanity cost is perfectly appropriate, but many of the spells are too costly for the benefit they provide, and more often than not you have to lose sanity to first obtain the spell. A handful of the spells are appropriately priced but are overly situational - which I would be okay with if those two types of spells didn't comprise the majority of the deck. It's a problem even the developers have mentioned, and it compromises the thematic enjoyability that spellcasting provides. Even Daisy, who is by far the best spellcaster in the game, is a tough character to play well because of how gimmicky and unreliable the spell deck is. This is why, despite the OPness of her ability, she only ranks in the low-middle power-wise.

avec said:

I looked that over, interesting read. If I decide to trim the spell-deck I'll likely use his guidelines, but I am also looking for ways to buff some of the spells. I need to post what I've done but I haven't yet because it's time consuming. I will do it later because I really do want feedback on it.

Einlanzer80 said:

First of all, I strongly disagree with what you said about Daisy. Turn one, you get her alchemy. Then you shop at the magic shop for 2-4 turns. You should have some very overpowered spells for her at that point. I mean, really, double shriveling at no sanity cost. Even if it's a shrivelling and a wither, that's still insane combat bonuses. Every turn of the game she'll be making $3 (compare that to Jenny's ability which is only a third as effective and her stats are better, and she has no spell costs. Of course, every Voice of Ra she draws is the equivalent of 3 ally's worth of stat increases.

If you play Daisy effectively (instead of searching for a find gate or an arcane insight) so that she grows exponentially more powerful as the game increase, you'll see what she's really capable (of being the strongest, fastest, most versatile character in the game, once she gets fully supplied). If you don't start her properly, then yes, she's a second tier character, but if you play her ruthlessly, she becomes Daisy, Goddess of War, Librarian of Doom :') (Seriously, I rarely lose a game I play with Daisy unless I deliberately don't search for an alchemy to self-handicap).

Uh.

Another tweak for making the spell deck more powerful, increase spell shopping draws to three cards.

I've found the best and simplest way to make use of magic in Arkham is to just trim the spell deck to contain spells that are non-combat oriented like Find Gate, Forced Learning and Bless. That way anything drawn is useful and not copied in a better way by a unique item (which most combat spells are).

I also wrote this thread at BGG which has some great suggestions dealing with magic in the game .

Avi_dreader said:

Yes, Daisy's ability is far too good. I agree on that point. Her ability is OP as hell AND she starts with whatever spell she wants. The point I was making is that, despite that, she's not very consistent power-wise and is easy to play sloppily- most people aren't going to use that strategy and even that strategy isn't fool-proof. This is backed up by the statistical reports that show Daisy ranking in the lower middle out of all the investigators. This actually reinforces my point about the spell deck. Daisy's ability should only work once per turn, and the spells should generally be more powerful so that you don't have to use Daisy to be a worthwhile spell-caster.

Increasing the spell shop to 3 cards is a given, but it alone really isn't enough to make visiting the shop worthwhile for the vast majority of investigators.The real problem with spells is that because of their cost vs. benefit, they are only worthwhile to deal with for investigators that have a good spell-casting related ability. And those investigators often end up under-performing compared to those with other specializations.

bioball said:

I read through that thread extensively (and posted on it a few times).

Einlanzer80 said:

Some spells that instruct "cast and discard" are actually one of the more powerful spells, and if they had unlimited use they would definitely be broken. And what you said it about being conceptually weird...... well trading spells and treating them as items was kind of a strange idea in the first place, so I don't find these "cast and discard" spells any weirder than that.

Einlanzer80 said:

Every few months I say this... The statistics are meaningless. All they represent are the averages for the players who use those investigators and who submit reports. People didn't used to understand how to use Wendy properly either; just because they didn't didn't make her weak, it just meant that they didn't use her well. Daisy is the same.

She's extremely consistent power-wise, particularly if you get her an alchemy and if you're in a rush, a bank loan so she can start off with a quick load of cash for spell shopping. If she is used well and people strategize their game around her being in it, she is extremely powerful. If people just flail around with her, she's only so-so. If a team has Daisy on it and does not play cooperatively, it can sabotage her also, unlike the other top tier characters, she doesn't operate nearly as well without some early financial and equipment support from the team. If the proper early game investments are made in her though, she'll pay back with interest (her initial alchemy is usually worth $40+ over the course of the game— of course it's really more of you think about what fast easy money gets you through victorious encounters and combat as well).

I do not think the statistics are without any meaning. It's not advised to take values as absolute comparisons, but there's something to be said about Patrice Hathaway finally beating out long-time 1st place Mandy Thompson even though Patrice is part of the hardest expansion.

Yeah, statistics aren't meaningless. They're just hard to interpret. Powerful investigators tend to be correlated with tough AOs, like Tibs said.

Tibs said:

Okay, perhaps I should have been more clear. They represent how the score submitters play the game. They are not a large enough sample or a fully random all encompassing of all players skill levels and strategy types to be statistically significant for any sort of authoritative statements about what things mean in terms of game difficulty. Better? I can make it worse if you'd like ;'D

It's hard for me to say that Patrice is stronger than Mandy, but honestly, she probably is... I hate to say it. While it's true that Mandy allows for grotesque abuses of skill checks with her teleport reroll ability, Patrice's ability to generate and teleport clues trumps anything (and it's so easy to implement, even if your investigators are poorly equipped). You can just toss unprepared investigators into gates and feed them clues (if they're successful, if not, oh well, there're more where they came from). Kind of sad though. It's pretty impossible to fail Patrice's personal story too... All you have to do is funnel her a bit of money. Really, it shouldn't be surprising that she's an auto-game winner. 20+ teleportable clues per game. Ridiculous. She basically gives you the resources to close 4.5 gates with minimal preparation or risk... You have to be deliberately sending her into risky situations and wasting clues (or be fabulously unlucky) to lose a game with her.