I see the devs posting in a lot of class forums can we please hav an answer about our seal line?

[Nere]

---

Straylight wrote:

Mando's logic is correct.

The issue here is that you kids are just looking for any reason whatsoever to whine and cry like a pack of kindergarten rats that peed their pull-ups.

You have more DPS than the other caster classes.  You can also apply your forte' (full encounter, multi-target DPS) to other roles (single target DPS on raids) with good enough effect to be able to meet and in many cases surpass wizards, whom are suppoed to be the caster class with the highest single-target DPS.

You're crying about a spell that gives you a noticeable advantage on the same lines that the +melee and +defense skills help shape the fighter classes because you're TOO STUPID to use basic logic to understand the nature of the spell.

You [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn] are pathetic.

I'm pretty sure most any of the other caster classes would be willing to swap their comparable spell in this line for one that gives them a bonus to their primary casting ability.  I know I would.

Are you all that inept?  Are you part of the growing generation of tardlings that learned to read by phonics instead of understanding the meaning of the words?  Has any and all forms of basic reading comprehension and math ability been lost to you?

Here's a scenario.  You're a police officer.  You do your job and notice that many officers are being injured after the suspects are taken into custody.  Then...one day, your department issues handcuffs to all officers as part of your general lineup of gear.  After a while, you notice that not nearly as many officers are being injured after the suspects are being taken into custody, but instead of realizing it's because that new 'handcuff' thing is reducing the threat, you complain that they add another pound to your duty belt that could best be used by adding another clip of ammo.

The logic has escaped you all.  

The Devs need to swap this spell out with the Wizard's 'Fist of the Tyrant.'  You can have the silly +INT and +STR.  We'll take the +Disruption.  The boon this spell provides is obviously wasted on the lesser casters, anyway.  Let the folks with finesse' have it for a while.

Noobs.

Chances are....you losers always 'push' the 'pull' doors first, too.  Every time. 

---

Press your head to the monitor, maybe you can somehow absorb this through osmosis. The spell does not work. If you were a warlock and if you had ever cast the frickin spell maybe you would have something to contribute here. Since you are neither, the only reason I can find for you trolling here is jealousy. Go work out your problems elsewhere please. There is a wizard forum for you to cry in.

[tiki-jiki]

As a Warlock, i dont see why we are griping. I dont have a lot of uber items, but when im level 60 ill have close to a 400 int. I dont need 50 more, which i can probably get by grouping with another buffer. The seal line gives us something unique and i for one am happy we have it.

[Moonspark]

---

tiki-jiki wrote:
As a Warlock, i dont see why we are griping. I dont have a lot of uber items, but when im level 60 ill have close to a 400 int. I dont need 50 more, which i can probably get by grouping with another buffer. The seal line gives us something unique and i for one am happy we have it.

---

rofl

You won't have 400 int self buffed with non-uber items

[Maelwy]

tested out tonight.  with seal of ebon on (adept 1) i got about 5x the fizzles per hour than with vivid seal. 

However, it was only on specific spells.  netherous realm adept 3, corrupt gift adept 3, and Ghastly Contract, adept 1

 

other than that, there was no beneficial effects noted throughout the evening when i applied it. 

There was no noticeable increase in parsed dps for me, or the rest of the group.  My dps was lower with the buff on- attributable to the increased fizzle rates on gift, and netherous realm, as well as the lower int.

Group consisted of 60 zerker, 59 bruiser, 55 Troub, 60 defiler, 57 fury, and 60 warlock.  at one point, we had a 60 conj instead of the bruiser.

we were in poets palace, ancients table, coin instance, and shai'ir ring event- so this did get tested on upper tier mobs, mostly yellow to orange, at endgame content levels.  I was running about 405 int when ebon seal was on, 418 when seal was on.

without ebon seal, i have 303 disruption, 300ord 287 min, 302 subj solo.   Add 19 when buffed.   

By all rights according to lockeyes confirmation of its intended purpose, my results should have been just the opposite tonight.  But i'm telling you, it wasnt the case.

 

[Moonspark]

---

Maelwys1 wrote:

tested out tonight.  with seal of ebon on (adept 1) i got about 5x the fizzles per hour than with vivid seal. 

Love the numbers you supply, very ground breaking and informative.

However, it was only on specific spells.  netherous realm adept 3, corrupt gift adept 3, and Ghastly Contract, adept 1

I use those spells everytime they're up, sometimes I have the seal buff on, sometimes not...I probably get 1 fizzle a day total. (Yea, not a spreadsheet of numbers, but much more accurate than 5x the fizzles) Netherous Realm is ordination, Corrupt Gift is ordination, Ghastly Contract is Ministration...  Your ministration is low so I can see you fizzling Ghastly Contract, but I SERIOUSLY doubt this buff is causing you to fizzle MORE.  It honestly doesn't make any sense, I have all my skills capped and I so very insanely rarely get fizzles on anything, with or without the buff.  You can't fizzle a hostile spell, btw, which is why those are the spells you are fizzling on.  Perhaps your character is bugged, that's about as logical as blaming our  buff =)

other than that, there was no beneficial effects noted throughout the evening when i applied it. 

There was no noticeable increase in parsed dps for me, or the rest of the group.  My dps was lower with the buff on- attributable to the increased fizzle rates on gift, and netherous realm, as well as the lower int.

Group consisted of 60 zerker, 59 bruiser, 55 Troub, 60 defiler, 57 fury, and 60 warlock.  at one point, we had a 60 conj instead of the bruiser.

we were in poets palace, ancients table, coin instance, and shai'ir ring event- so this did get tested on upper tier mobs, mostly yellow to orange, at endgame content levels.  I was running about 405 int when ebon seal was on, 418 when seal was on.

without ebon seal, i have 303 disruption, 300ord 287 min, 302 subj solo.   Add 19 when buffed.

 

By all rights according to lockeyes confirmation of its intended purpose, my results should have been just the opposite tonight.  But i'm telling you, it wasnt the case.

 

---

[Tanit]

---

Moonspark wrote:

rofl

You won't have 400 int self buffed with non-uber items

---

There are tons of treasured quest rewards that give a lot of int, plus if you get some legendary vl armor you'll get a lot as well. Reaching the cap is easy. At least i dont hope you think rare crafted is uber. Neither of these buffs is more usefull than the other. The str buff is rather useless, though it makes me carry more i guess... Personally i'd rather have more disruption since i always raid and in raids i have 550+ int, which makes my own buff useless. Well i dont really care either way. If any of you is clueless enough to think (lacking) any of these buffs is breaking your class, then whine on.

[Stavenh]

---

Moonspark wrote:

He's a dev, he most likely perma stunned the mob and nuked it to test out the spell.  There is NO need for him to be getting hit, there is no need for him to have a full group, there is no need for ANYTHING outside the buff effecting him.  That is how you test things, without outside variables effecting you.

 

Your points are moot.  There, is that a better response?

---

My point isn't moot. He tested a spell to see how much of a difference it would make in a situation that didn't reflect actual game play. What good is know that you can get up to 45% more spells landing on a mob that is 8 levels higher then you providing that the mob can't ever hit you?

 

All that does it make it seem like 45% is alot. Even if this was a spell designed for raids, a level 50 tank isn't going to last long against a level 50 raid mob. So gain, this spell isn't even very situational.

 

Oh and first it was, he must of had a tank, now you say, he doesn't really need to test in real conditions. Since you are changing your idea of how he tested, I guess you don't really know what your talking about.

[Tanit]

---

Stavenham wrote:

My point isn't moot. He tested a spell to see how much of a difference it would make in a situation that didn't reflect actual game play. What good is know that you can get up to 45% more spells landing on a mob that is 8 levels higher then you providing that the mob can't ever hit you?

---

Since you only need to test how spells land it doesnt matter at all how he tested it. Whether he had a tank and healer like in a normal group or permarooted the mob with some dev trick is exactly the same. The only problem you could have with that test is that he only casted 50 times.

[Straylig]

**REMOVED INAPPROPRIATE POST**

 

Message Edited by Raijinn Thunderguard on 11-08-2005 10:28 AM

[Victicu]

Straylight i'd still like to know what red con mobs you are raiding. Go ahead tell us all!!

 

Also you are not raiding oranges every night unless your are wiping to the dragons in MD every night... i doubt you are in poets palace the return... and even then it has a lockout timer... and i doubt you are raiding fountain of life every night, if so please tell us your uber eye hunting secrets.

 

So i'll feel really nice to disreguard anything you say, thanks!

[Dart]

---

Straylight wrote:

**REMOVED INAPPROPRIATE POST**

---

Hehe nice post, way to make friends :p. To be honest you dont play a walrock so how would you know what this spell does, doesnt do. 

 

-Yes we are all Kiddys, you are the only mature one on these boards

-Oh yes we have more dps than anyone, /looks over a the Conj

-We cry

-We are pathetic

-We are inept

-Your a police occifer? can I shake your hand?

-Our logic escapes us

-We are noobs

-We are loosers

-That about sum it up for you?

 

 

 

Lol some people /boggle, It was worht a good laugh though thanks!

Message Edited by Raijinn Thunderguard on 11-08-2005 10:29 AM

[MilkToa]

Hmmm, I thought this was suppose to be a discussion about the seal line.

 

[Cuz]

No offense to anyone here, but if you feel that a spell that will make it so you will get resisted less is useless, then you're either well off, or you are "too" well off. 

 

What I mean is maybe mob resists should be upped? I mean people here are saying the never get resisted against even con mobs. I get resisted a good 10% easy with my low level casters, maybe the resist rate if skewed at higher levels?

[Stavenh]

---

Straylight wrote:

**REMOVED INAPPROPRIATE POST**

---

It's great when people post like this. Here you are, presenting your arguement, which mostly invovles tearing other people down. And at the same time, saying things like, "I like to get laid"

If this is the way you respond to what people have to say, why should anyone think what you have to say is based on thoughtful response? Thanks for letting the whole forum know that you have sex. I was wondering about that. Sorry, but the fact that you have a girlfriend who has sex with you is part of why you didn't get to 60 in three days has nothing to do with the thread.

And your telling people to relax and breath in, breath out?

I'm not saying that +distruption isn't useful. I'm saying that the way it's tested is not going to give you the same results in actual game play. Meaning, test it in a real game situation and see what kinds of results you get.

 

But I guess your to busy having sex with your girlfriend and then bragging about it to think.

 

But congrats on your Gold Medal.

Message Edited by Raijinn Thunderguard on 11-08-2005 10:29 AM

[pharacyde]

The question about the affect of the seal line was answered. If it is usefull or not is another question. Anyway for me it put some light on when to use it.

[Stavenh]

It's not a question of if the spell works, it's a question of is it useful in practical terms.

This is his test,

A level 50 warlock with the master version of the buff, against a level 58 mob, and casting a level 3 spell 50 times, and getting a 45% increaces in the number of times this level 3 spell landed. 16 out of 50.

Good to know 16 hits of a level 3 spell is gonna really hurt those level 58 mobs.

[Moonspark]

---

Tanith_ wrote:

---

Moonspark wrote:

rofl

You won't have 400 int self buffed with non-uber items

---

There are tons of treasured quest rewards that give a lot of int, plus if you get some legendary vl armor you'll get a lot as well. Reaching the cap is easy.
At least i dont hope you think rare crafted is uber.

Neither of these buffs is more usefull than the other. The str buff is rather useless, though it makes me carry more i guess...
Personally i'd rather have more disruption since i always raid and in raids i have 550+ int, which makes my own buff useless. Well i dont really care either way. If any of you is clueless enough to think (lacking) any of these buffs is breaking your class, then whine on.

---

Hat I have has 15(5 less than rare), chest has 16(4 less than rare), shoulders 16, wrist 15, hand 18, pants 17, boots 18, two 12 dolls, 25 primary, 14 offhand (6 less than an easy to get item I already have), 15 in the belt, 10 on both wrists, 16 and 17 on rings, 15 on earring, 14 on neck and a buff from a pearl ring that gives 22.  All of that and I'm sitting at 354, to be fair at the easy to get 14 from the rares and offhand and 2 from the dolls, 370.  Hell let's even give you that 25 int belt, that's 380.

[Darkcreat]

Another thing that has been bothering me all night is that this buff does absolutely nothing for the melee type characters we group with. The int/str buff benefits all classes, all the time.

Boy my Guardian friend is really going to enjoy his extra Ordination skill when he's scraping his left arm off the pavement. :p

[Thibor24]

It looks like we scared the dev away, it was going so well until things got personal.

Now we probably wont hear anything for anohter two months and we still dont know if this spell even works.

 

[Findara]

---

Straylight wrote:

---

Victicus7 wrote:

A wizard with an int buff will always get the full benefit of his buff... from grey cons up to red cons, he always gets a steady increase in dps

---

Wow...now who's the one that's clueless.  You're assuming, of course, that the wizard isn't already at their cap...which, if they are, the int buff doesn't really do anything...  Also, to get any increase in DPS, a caster has to hit their target....which a +disruption buff would really help.

 

---

Victicus7 wrote:

Heres the catch... at level 60 how many red and orange cons do you fight in one night compared to yellow-grey cons?? At 60 you will fight ZERO red cons period.  MAYBE 1-2 orange cons a night if your raiding very very heavily.  So warlocks have a buff that is useful for 1-2 encounters a night out of hundreds. (i could go over a week and never fight an orange con encounters)

---

At level 60, I primarily raid.  On the raids -I- go on, many of the encounters con orange to me.  (With a few reds thrown in)  I have to say, I could really use some +disruption to help my spells land with much more regularity.  Currently, I'm probably hitting about a 50% success rate.

 

I'm not sure what you're raiding, but I'd be happy to trade buffs with you.  I'd get a lot more use out of it apparantly.

---

Star I have seen every high end raid zone and I am level 60, There are 0 Red mobs, most are orange, and the high orange (67) no one can even take, they hit for 6-8K to a full tier 6 fabled tank.  Please do not act like you know what you clearly do not.  When forming caster groups I never base it around the fact that I am buffing their disruption, nor have I ever had my Seal line up, and I am Hitting the orange con mobs (even high orange) for full with debuffs on, and at a very acceptable rate.  I have done my own tests and seen maybe 1 out of 25 nukes land with seal or with out. That could also be from a roll where I hit, and not based on my disruption skill at all.  Normally on a raid I am grouped with a troub and from my knowledge they also buff disruption, putting my disruption at about 340ish (I do have some +disruption gear tossed in there as well).  Hitting the int cap is not very hard with the correct group (fury helps more than anything), but still having a + to skills that at the current do nothing seems like a wasted con slot.

[Moonspark]

The dev came in, tested it and said it wasn't changing...that's the end of it.

[Aral]

I am just staggered, boggled that the dev could consider that test as a significance test.  Not only does it not prove or disprove whether the spell does ANYTHING, it doesn't even give us a hint.  You may not need 1000 trials, but you need more.  There is a huge amount of variability built into SoE's "random" number generator.  Just assuming that a proportion of .32 vs .22 is significant won't cut it. 

 

In other words, he completely fails to reject the null here: We should continue to assume that this spell does absolutely nothing.  You could easily see two 50-trial tests with this much variability without no changes whatsoever.  

 

On top of that, he tested vs. red.  Un. Believable.

[Cuz]

---

Aralys wrote:

I am just staggered, boggled that the dev could consider that test as a significance test.  Not only does it not prove or disprove whether the spell does ANYTHING, it doesn't even give us a hint.  You may not need 1000 trials, but you need more.  There is a huge amount of variability built into SoE's "random" number generator.  Just assuming that a proportion of .32 vs .22 is significant won't cut it. 

 

In other words, he completely fails to reject the null here: We should continue to assume that this spell does absolutely nothing.  You could easily see two 50-trial tests with this much variability without no changes whatsoever.  

 

On top of that, he tested vs. red.  Un. Believable.

---

Cuz he might not have the time to do so. This the first time I've ever seen numbers from a dev testing wise. I'd be surprised to see another.

 

Findarato
Ask your troub buddy to remove the buff, you also remove yours. Kill a few, then one of you put on, then the other, and finally both. Maybe we could find some more numbers that way. If you're too busy I have a level 30 troub, and a few Warlocks in the guild. I guess I could try to get them to play there alts with me and waste some time

[K@z]

Hi, I'll try to write some my experience :smileyhappy:

 

It is some time ago, had Quest Fallen from Beauty in Pillars, don't remember my level, but had Seal of Dark Rumi... masterI on. Target is to go and speak with some member of Ashen Order. He give you update to kill harpies. I go there in invis, all was yellow and orange for me. Talked to him and see named harpie with one add spawned (if I remember correctly, both was 1 arrow down), lowest orange for me. Hmm orange, but I have my uber m1 skill technique adjustment :smileywink:

Begin with bony, nice both rooted. But from now, Cower (master1) to named-resisted-, debuff -resisted-, some DD -resisted-, last 30s of duration casted again Bony and Cower, only Cower had one success on add. Than named was free, last try with Deter and Vulian ... and than...my death. Very nice :smileyindifferent:

When soloing using Vivid Seal a3, in group now Seal of Ebon Thought, because have in group wizard. Don't see visible difference in using or not using.

In group when fighting high orange or low red, was there some tries. But only effect is debt, because I rise only  casting skills, so if spells has better chance to land, the tank taunts not = dead mages and priests :smileywink:

 

btw will be free respec after LU16?

[Tiranus62]

Hello, First i just wanna say that i'm french so excuse me for possibles mistakes in my post, i'll do my best ! I play on Storm serveur, a Lvl 45 Warlock and here is my situation : * My stuff is just an "average" one that's mean i'm far far away from the INT cap reachable. * My spells are NOT maxed : Master 2 for the main nuk and all others in adept 1... * More, i'm NOT going to have the SoD extension, so my cap lvl will be 50. * I play in a guild with friends in groups of 2 to 6 guys (tank, heal, etc...), sometimes solo anyway. So, What i want to say is "i'm not a hardcorte gamer playing Orange/Red mobs in raid everynight" buy more simply a "simple" warlock searching for green to white when solo and same colors heroics when grouped. Let me say that i'm very happy playing this way so i wont spends hours just to find the "best stuff aviable" for me. Beside, i'm very happy with all warlock spells. I have big pleasure to play with. In this point of view, the probleme for me is : Is it better for me to use "Dark Rumination" or should i use "Vivid seal" ? (and not "Dark Rumination" VS "nothing att all") Reading this thread, i'm sure now that Dark Rumination is useless for me, as my own experience using this spell told me already. I got no choice, that grey low level speel giving me some INT is the only thing i'm able to put on with some effect. I'm very happy to think about thoses guys max-equiped who find somethink usefull in Dark Rumination. That's not my case. That's not the case for my friends. That's not the case for MOST of warlocks i talk about with. Just something more and i promise it's the end   : I remember an old RP game (i wont tell name and company) with spells, stuffs, etc... not MMORPG but played online in group of 6 players maxi (yes, this is about this big red devil beast). Somethink REALY NICE was the very nice offical website where we were able to find REAL EXPLANATION OF ALL SPELLS, with FULL EXPLANATIONS, DATAS, BOARDS about how works each spell (and stuff). What do i find here for EQ2 ? : ingame screenshots, sometimes showing master versions, sometimes adept 1 or 3...., list of spells with short explanation. No more. So don't be surprise when player have to ask directly to Developpers what the purpose of this spell. It's just the result of an outrageous lake off SoE communication... Have fun in game anyway. Ekenae

Message modifié par Tiranus62 le 11-09-2005 11:27 AM

[Tanit]

---

Moonspark wrote:

Hat I have has 15(5 less than rare), chest has 16(4 less than rare), shoulders 16, wrist 15, hand 18, pants 17, boots 18, two 12 dolls, 25 primary, 14 offhand (6 less than an easy to get item I already have), 15 in the belt, 10 on both wrists, 16 and 17 on rings, 15 on earring, 14 on neck and a buff from a pearl ring that gives 22.  All of that and I'm sitting at 354, to be fair at the easy to get 14 from the rares and offhand and 2 from the dolls, 370.  Hell let's even give you that 25 int belt, that's 380.

---

I'll admit it's a little harder than i thought with standard gear. However, with 380 int the difference between that and max int isnt that big. +200 max dmg at most for ice comet, far less for other spells. With less resists (from seal) you would even that out, assuming your spell works. Having a necro, coercer or a fury (not sure about others) in the group would bring you far above max int. Thing is, the buff that's most usefull to you entirely depends on your playstyle. For raids i'd prefer a skillbonus, for soloing i guess int is more usefull. Just because it's not usefull for you doesnt make it useless for everyone and soe won't (and shouldnt) base their balance on personal wishes.  Ofcourse if the spell doesnt work like lockeye says then it's a bug that should be fixed.

[Ronzul]

---

Will. wrote:

Actually 11 of 50 is a 22% success rate and 16 of 50 is a 32% success rate. 32% is 1.4545% of 22% or rounded, a 45% increase. Yes, .22 + .10 = .32 but that's not how a percentage increase or improvement is calculated.

-Will

---

First you have to show that 5/50 is a significant increase over the noise level of the data (5 sets of 10 casts would have been more useful than 1 set of 50).  In this case I'd be willing to bet that it isn't.  And by your math, we only have to find a success rate that is low enough to make our "% increase" seem large.  So if the unbuffed rate had been 1/50 and the buffed rate had been 3/50, WOW, a 200% increase!  But what does that actually mean?  You're still doing almost no damage to the mob.

 

Anytime you see something like "% increase", get ready for an example of how to make statistics say what you want them to say.

[Ronzul]

Oh, and if you want this spell line to be worth casting, then make it work by reducing the target's mitigation, not just outright resist rate.  Resist rates in EQ2 are set pretty well, as evidenced by the devs' reluctance to have a buff that has any meaningful effect on them.

[Stavenh]

---

Ronzul wrote:

---

Will. wrote:

Actually 11 of 50 is a 22% success rate and 16 of 50 is a 32% success rate. 32% is 1.4545% of 22% or rounded, a 45% increase. Yes, .22 + .10 = .32 but that's not how a percentage increase or improvement is calculated.

-Will

---

First you have to show that 5/50 is a significant increase over the noise level of the data (5 sets of 10 casts would have been more useful than 1 set of 50).  In this case I'd be willing to bet that it isn't.  And by your math, we only have to find a success rate that is low enough to make our "% increase" seem large.  So if the unbuffed rate had been 1/50 and the buffed rate had been 3/50, WOW, a 200% increase!  But what does that actually mean?  You're still doing almost no damage to the mob.

 

Anytime you see something like "% increase", get ready for an example of how to make statistics say what you want them to say.

---

Nice to see you and a few others also get that this test doesn't show the reality of using it. It's basically, crap buff, which may help land a nuke every few fights, not some 45% increase in landing spells.

[Maelwy]

---

Stavenham wrote:

---

Ronzul wrote:

---

Will. wrote:

Actually 11 of 50 is a 22% success rate and 16 of 50 is a 32% success rate. 32% is 1.4545% of 22% or rounded, a 45% increase. Yes, .22 + .10 = .32 but that's not how a percentage increase or improvement is calculated.

-Will

---

First you have to show that 5/50 is a significant increase over the noise level of the data (5 sets of 10 casts would have been more useful than 1 set of 50).  In this case I'd be willing to bet that it isn't.  And by your math, we only have to find a success rate that is low enough to make our "% increase" seem large.  So if the unbuffed rate had been 1/50 and the buffed rate had been 3/50, WOW, a 200% increase!  But what does that actually mean?  You're still doing almost no damage to the mob.

 

Anytime you see something like "% increase", get ready for an example of how to make statistics say what you want them to say.

---

Nice to see you and a few others also get that this test doesn't show the reality of using it. It's basically, crap buff, which may help land a nuke every few fights, not some 45% increase in landing spells.

---

yes, i agree.

Lockeye's test paints a rosy picture... he used one of our lowest spells, against a mob 50 some levels above the initial grant of the spell. And while at red con to the mob, so as to portray a high level of resists.

Then putting the buff on, there is a noticeable increase in hit percentage.

Wow, thats an effective buff, isn't it?!

In reality, due to sony's level band changes, and mitigation, and resist changes recently, a NORMAL group of adventurers will be exp'ing on blue to yellow mobs, where the resist rate is much lower. This results in greater survivability, better exp, and a more satisfying group experience. While at end game, occasionally in instances, and raiding, we will be taking on orange encounters. Our resist rates are STILL pretty minimal, so any decrease to our resist rates are negligable.

Now, if you get outright resists on 1 out of 50 spells whn fighting more appropriately levelled mobs, and you decrease that by 45%, you will get a resist .55 times out of 50. or just about 1 out of every 100 spells.

I don't know about you, but i tend to only get off 3 spells or so in a normal encounter. so a buff that takes me approximately 30 encounters to see a single benefit from is not worth spending the concentration on.

Not to mention wasting a rare, or multiple plat to get it at adept 3, or master where those kinds of resist rate changes actually occur. and i'm certainly not blowing the m2 choice on it when i can choose a spell that i will cast almost every fight.