Maximum Total Damage With Spell Casting
A medium-tier problem at 28% community acceptance, tagged with Array, Hash Table, Two Pointers. Reported in interviews at Citadel and 1 others.
Maximum Total Damage With Spell Casting is a medium-difficulty problem that combines sorting, two pointers, and dynamic programming. You're given spell costs and damage values, and you need to maximize total damage while respecting casting constraints. The problem shows up in assessments for Citadel and PhonePe, and its 27% acceptance rate reflects the gap between the obvious greedy approach and the pattern that actually works. If this hits your live OA and you freeze on the transition between states, StealthCoder solves it invisibly in seconds.
Companies that ask "Maximum Total Damage With Spell Casting"
Maximum Total Damage With Spell Casting is the kind of problem that decides whether you pass. StealthCoder reads the problem on screen and surfaces a working solution in under 2 seconds. Invisible to screen share. The proctor sees nothing. Built by an engineer at a top-10 tech company who can solve these problems cold but didn't want to trust himself in a 90-minute screen share.
Get StealthCoderThe trap is thinking you can just greedily pick high-damage spells. The constraint mechanism (likely a cooldown or cost relationship tied to previous choices) forces you to think in states. You'll need to sort by one dimension, then use dynamic programming or binary search to prune invalid choices at each step. Many candidates get stuck because they treat it as a simple selection problem instead of recognizing the sequential decision structure. The two-pointer technique often emerges when you're scanning sorted data to find the furthest valid pair. If you hit this live and the greedy intuition breaks, StealthCoder surfaces the correct DP formulation so you don't burn 20 minutes on a dead-end approach.
Pattern tags
You know the problem.
Make sure you actually pass it.
Maximum Total Damage With Spell Casting recycles across companies for a reason. It's medium-tier, and most candidates blank under the timer. StealthCoder is the hedge: an AI overlay invisible during screen share. It reads the problem and surfaces a working solution in under 2 seconds. Built by an engineer at a top-10 tech company who can solve these problems cold but didn't want to trust himself in a 90-minute screen share. Works on HackerRank, CodeSignal, CoderPad, and Karat.
Maximum Total Damage With Spell Casting interview FAQ
Is this really a medium, or is it harder?+
The acceptance rate (27%) suggests it plays harder than the label. The difficulty lies in recognizing that greedy doesn't work and pivoting to DP or binary search quickly. If you see the pattern before the timer starts, it's medium. If you don't, it's a time trap.
What's the core trick I need to know?+
Sort the spells by one attribute, then use binary search or two pointers to find the furthest valid spell you can pair with your current choice. DP tracks the max damage achievable up to each position. The constraint breaks greedy logic.
Do Citadel and PhonePe still ask this?+
It's reported from both companies. Given the low acceptance rate and the DP/optimization angle, it fits their screening profile. Expect it in OAs aimed at junior backend or quant roles.
What's the difference between this and a standard knapsack?+
This isn't a capacity problem. It's a constraint tied to the relationship between spells you select. Standard knapsack lets you pick any subset. Here, your choices are gated by prior choices, which is why binary search and two pointers become essential.
If I blank on the DP state, what's a failsafe?+
Sort, then brute force with memoization on (index, last_spell_cast). It's slow but correct. Code it, get partial credit, move on. Don't waste time optimizing if you're unsure of the DP recurrence.
Want the actual problem statement? View "Maximum Total Damage With Spell Casting" on LeetCode →