It's a Kind of Magic

[Odarbi]

I like out of combat utility for each class. Dragging a rogue around with me everywhere because I want to is okay. Dragging a rogue around with me everywhere because I have to if I want to disable the traps or whatever... not so much a fan.

I'm not so big on the idea the spell leveling up from "Open lock lvl1" to "Open lock lvl2". Spells should definitely increase in power as the player levels, but it should be based more on a characters magical proficiency. Whether that is determined by a skill that increases as magic is used, or based off character level, I'm not really worried.

[Haawkings]

This is how Black Isle used to fix this:

 

The Thief could decide what he wanted to lvl, be it sneak, traps, lockpicks or so.

The Magician could only open locks if he had the right spell for it, the harder the lock, the higher lvl spell was needed.

Fighter classes could bash open the lock if he had enough strength, and in the process he might get unlucky and destroy the loot.

 

This way you could decide who you wanted to have what utility, the fighter beeing the worst choice for opening locks ofc :D If they are doing this oldschool I wouldn't worry about it.

[Odarbi]

If a mage have Open spell, I'll kill him/her with my lockpicks. It means that playing a thief class will be obsolete - why will you need a thief at all if you can open locks, detect traps or even steal with a mage? On a second thought, it depends on what kind of magic system they will use. If it is memorization, for example, it can't be that bad because you will need to memorize a lot of Open or Detect spells. I'm not against non-combat magic, but it should be more balanced.

 

Actually, thieves had more important roles than just disarming traps and picking locks. Mechanically speaking a Magic-User could open locks and such, yes, but thieves had something a Wizard lacked and that was "street smarts". Every bit important as it sounds. They always knew where to get the best deals, who was untrustworthy and what was the safest place in town. Basically they acted as the party guide whenever they got into the bigger cities. I'd LOVE to see something like this implemented in PE. Social skills are every bit as awesome as combat skills, sometimes even more so.

 

One of the other things Rogues could do in BG2 that some people probably didn't know about was detect illusions. They also had Backstab, which is a more commonly known skill. This made them prime characters to be "mage hunters", as they could potentially catch a mage unaware early on and take them out in one blow, or they could at least know which mage was the real one, in the case of mirror image or some other illusionary effect.

[The Sharmat]

I remember there were instances in Torment where a high dexterity character could catch people attempting to pick pocket him. More stuff like that would be nice. Though perhaps with higher stakes every once in awhile, too. Mages don't have to have all the fun.

[Lysen]

Actually, thieves had more important roles than just disarming traps and picking locks. Mechanically speaking a Magic-User could open locks and such, yes, but thieves had something a Wizard lacked and that was "street smarts". Every bit important as it sounds. They always knew where to get the best deals, who was untrustworthy and what was the safest place in town. Basically they acted as the party guide whenever they got into the bigger cities. I'd LOVE to see something like this implemented in PE. Social skills are every bit as awesome as combat skills, sometimes even more so.

 

It wasn't implemented in IE games, I think. But I agree, thieves can have more class-specific abilities than disarming traps or backstabbing, and it will balance Open spell.

[Hobo Elf]

Actually, thieves had more important roles than just disarming traps and picking locks. Mechanically speaking a Magic-User could open locks and such, yes, but thieves had something a Wizard lacked and that was "street smarts". Every bit important as it sounds. They always knew where to get the best deals, who was untrustworthy and what was the safest place in town. Basically they acted as the party guide whenever they got into the bigger cities. I'd LOVE to see something like this implemented in PE. Social skills are every bit as awesome as combat skills, sometimes even more so.

 

It wasn't implemented in IE games, I think. But I agree, thieves can have more class-specific abilities than disarming traps or backstabbing, and it will balance Open spell.

 

No, it wasn't. The IE games did a poor job at representing all the classes. Many of them were pretty backward compared to the PnP counterparts. For example: many times I see people make the mistake and think that all Wizards are Evokers with nothing but Fireballs in their spell tomes. In truth, in PnP, Evoker was one of the weaker type of Wizard.

[The Sharmat]

The potential level of detail in a completely nongraphical PNP game is inherently going to be superior than a videogame developed by a study, in their defense.

[Hobo Elf]

No argument there, but I still think Obsidian has the potential here to create something that will at least scratch the surface. It's not completely impossible. Social and out of combat skills being important and useful similar to a PnP game in a cRPG; it was done in 1992 by a bunch of German people. Obsidian can do it if they want to. Not only are they capable people but they won't be castrated or restrained by licenses and such other nonsense.

[Tale]

Where is the utility magic that has uses outside of just combat? That might actually make an impact on the story of the game. Like for example:

 

Storywise the party has to get past a door that is locked.

 

Thief class: Use a lockpick.

 

Warrior: Use your strength to force the door open.

 

Wizard: Cast an Open spell.

 

A very simple example. To that practically each class has a different way to get past the same situations.

Here's the thing I don't like about this. The Wizard actually has two ways past that door. They're the same two ways the other guys have, but he gets them both.

 

He doesn't just have an open spell. He can also blast the door with a spell like fireball. So he has the ability to open the lock like a thief and the ability to just bash it in like a warrior. And this strikes me as too much versatility.

 

Now, if we wanted to truly make the Wizard's approach unique, give him something like a teleport spell. The wizard can make it past the door better than the other two, but only for himself. It's a new way, with its own advantages and drawbacks. That's what I'd like to see out of utility.

[Paul D]

Great idea, the opportunity to practice/use non-combat spells, as well as create spell combinations and/or new spells. For example, an Invisibility Spell combined with a Silence spell, both for duration; allows you to hide your formation and sneek past the guards. How about telekensis to move items on the other side of a gate or moat you cannot get across; or to flick the switch to bring down a draw bridge.

 

Or (ok: thinking combat) combining a paralysis/de-buff/burn spell for 10 seconds; the enemy gets frozen, can't resist, and takes damage over time. Whe the mage can also become invisible turns the mage into a hidden creature of death!

[The Dark One Avoozl]

Where is the utility magic that has uses outside of just combat? That might actually make an impact on the story of the game. Like for example:

 

Storywise the party has to get past a door that is locked.

 

Thief class: Use a lockpick.

 

Warrior: Use your strength to force the door open.

 

Wizard: Cast an Open spell.

 

A very simple example. To that practically each class has a different way to get past the same situations.

Here's the thing I don't like about this. The Wizard actually has two ways past that door. They're the same two ways the other guys have, but he gets them both.

 

He doesn't just have an open spell. He can also blast the door with a spell like fireball. So he has the ability to open the lock like a thief and the ability to just bash it in like a warrior. And this strikes me as too much versatility.

 

Now, if we wanted to truly make the Wizard's approach unique, give him something like a teleport spell. The wizard can make it past the door better than the other two, but only for himself. It's a new way, with its own advantages and drawbacks. That's what I'd like to see out of utility.

 

Well to be fair you don't have to make the doors destroyable objects. More like make opening a locked door like a dialogue option.

 

"This door is locked what would you like to do?

 

1. Force door open.

2. Use lockpick.

3. Use Open spell. "

 

Basic example. The in world door is indestructable so you don't have wizards blasting through walls or doors and such.

[1varangian]

I'm all for non-combat magic.. it's an absolute must.

 

That said, I don't want magic to be the answer for everything. Using the locked doors as an example, I think the Rogue should be the only class who could possess the skills for a stealthy approach. Fighters and Mages should be limited to bashing or blowing up the door. (Doors should have hit points and damage reduction)

 

Socially, Rogues should be the ones with skills of persuasion to make NPC's act in a desired manner. The magic version would be forced mind control with appropriate consequences once it ends.

 

Likewise, I would like to see scrying magic - but I don't want it to replace a stealthy scout. Magic could give you an impression of a threat level, a feeling of danger, but only a Rogue would be able to sneak into a room and tell you exactly what to expect.

 

As for traveling, I like the idea of a Mage conjuring winds to make your ship sail faster, but I don't like the idea of simply teleporting to a remote destination unless it's hideously expensive, dangerous or draining for the mage so they basically never want to do it unless there's an emergency.

 

I like the idea of magic providing alternate solutions to quests. Such as magically imprisoning or brainwashing a villain instead of killing him.

[Tale]

Well to be fair you don't have to make the doors destroyable objects. More like make opening a locked door like a dialogue option.

 

"This door is locked what would you like to do?

 

1. Force door open.

2. Use lockpick.

3. Use Open spell. "

 

Basic example. The in world door is indestructable so you don't have wizards blasting through walls or doors and such.

I'd rather see them blast the door down than use an open lock spell if forced to choose between the two. Being able to open locks like that is such an important part of the thief archetype that he should probably be the best at it.

[SanguineAngel]

I'm all for non-combat magic.. it's an absolute must.

 

That said, I don't want magic to be the answer for everything. Using the locked doors as an example, I think the Rogue should be the only class who could possess the skills for a stealthy approach. Fighters and Mages should be limited to bashing or blowing up the door. (Doors should have hit points and damage reduction)

 

Socially, Rogues should be the ones with skills of persuasion to make NPC's act in a desired manner. The magic version would be forced mind control with appropriate consequences once it ends.

 

Likewise, I would like to see scrying magic - but I don't want it to replace a stealthy scout. Magic could give you an impression of a threat level, a feeling of danger, but only a Rogue would be able to sneak into a room and tell you exactly what to expect.

 

As for traveling, I like the idea of a Mage conjuring winds to make your ship sail faster, but I don't like the idea of simply teleporting to a remote destination unless it's hideously expensive, dangerous or draining for the mage so they basically never want to do it unless there's an emergency.

 

I like the idea of magic providing alternate solutions to quests. Such as magically imprisoning or brainwashing a villain instead of killing him.

 

The problem with your approach is that you end up hamstringing your party by not taking a Rogue along.

 

I'd not mind having multiple solutions to each problem based on each class. A Rogue might use their knowledge of the criminal underworld where a mage might use a charm spell - in both situations, still provided that they possess the necessary skills. Likewise, a fighter OR rogue might try intimidation, while a mage might teleport and a rogue or ranger might use stealth or a fighter simple brute force and a mage might fling a fireball. The only pre-requisite, really, is that the devs put a bit of thought into each situation as to how each class and temperament might tackle a situation.

Edited September 20, 2012 by SanguineAngel

[The Dark One Avoozl]

I'm all for non-combat magic.. it's an absolute must.

 

That said, I don't want magic to be the answer for everything. Using the locked doors as an example, I think the Rogue should be the only class who could possess the skills for a stealthy approach. Fighters and Mages should be limited to bashing or blowing up the door. (Doors should have hit points and damage reduction)

 

Kinda unrealistic that you can have a mage that teleports around but a spell to open a lock is too complicated. Well anyway instead of limiting options you could extend options. Like for example thieves could be very good at locations that require climbing or other athletic stuff that a "frail" wizard or a warrior in full armor can't logically do.

 

Socially, Rogues should be the ones with skills of persuasion to make NPC's act in a desired manner. The magic version would be forced mind control with appropriate consequences once it ends.

 

Or the charm spell could fail on persons that have exceptionally high willpower but are otherwise open to actual dialogue with a charismatic rogue

 

 

I like the idea of magic providing alternate solutions to quests. Such as magically imprisoning or brainwashing a villain instead of killing him.

 

A good example.

[The Dark One Avoozl]

I'd rather see them blast the door down than use an open lock spell if forced to choose between the two. Being able to open locks like that is such an important part of the thief archetype that he should probably be the best at it.

 

I think I see the problem. I go at it from a story point of view while you go at it from a gameplay point of view.

 

We have a world with magic. Tons of spells hopefully. And I'm just thinking. Here we have a wizard in his lab working on stuff. And he doesn't come up with spells that might help him at his work? Like making things easier for himself. Use an Open spell to open the chest at the far end of the room and a (example) telekinesis spell to fetch something out of it.

 

 

You just have to come up with stuff that a thief can do that a wizard or warrior can't. Like join a town's thieves' guild. Not possible when you play a wizard or warrior. That could give access to merchant that will buy stolen goods. It just takes some imagination. Never did I say that the Open spell should be silent or invisible. It's just there to open something. Never did I say it has to be stealthy.

 

 

*EDIT

 

Sorry for the double post :-/

Edited September 20, 2012 by The Dark One Avoozl

[Tale]

If you're coming at it from a story point of view, then how can you simply discredit tossing fireballs at doors in interior spaces?

 

Magic resistant locks would be easier and less expensive for regular use than fire resistant doors.

[SanguineAngel]

Fireballs are fine for storytelling, Tale. But your original posts indicated that a fireball is more in keeping with your vision of a Mage, which also implies your view of a mage as a combat unit rather than a person with a powerful and versatile talent, hence the idea that you were coming at it from the combat perspective I suppose.

 

for myself, I'd rather see a variety of options for everyone in the party to contribute in a way to fit your own party dynamic.

Edited September 20, 2012 by SanguineAngel

[1varangian]

I'm all for non-combat magic.. it's an absolute must.

 

That said, I don't want magic to be the answer for everything. Using the locked doors as an example, I think the Rogue should be the only class who could possess the skills for a stealthy approach. Fighters and Mages should be limited to bashing or blowing up the door. (Doors should have hit points and damage reduction)

 

Socially, Rogues should be the ones with skills of persuasion to make NPC's act in a desired manner. The magic version would be forced mind control with appropriate consequences once it ends.

 

Likewise, I would like to see scrying magic - but I don't want it to replace a stealthy scout. Magic could give you an impression of a threat level, a feeling of danger, but only a Rogue would be able to sneak into a room and tell you exactly what to expect.

 

As for traveling, I like the idea of a Mage conjuring winds to make your ship sail faster, but I don't like the idea of simply teleporting to a remote destination unless it's hideously expensive, dangerous or draining for the mage so they basically never want to do it unless there's an emergency.

 

I like the idea of magic providing alternate solutions to quests. Such as magically imprisoning or brainwashing a villain instead of killing him.

 

The problem with your approach is that you end up hamstringing your party by not taking a Rogue along.

 

I'd not mind having multiple solutions to each problem based on each class. A Rogue might use their knowledge of the criminal underworld where a mage might use a charm spell - in both situations, still provided that they possess the necessary skills. Likewise, a fighter OR rogue might try intimidation, while a mage might teleport and a rogue or ranger might use stealth or a fighter simple brute force and a mage might fling a fireball. The only pre-requisite, really, is that the devs put a bit of thought into each situation as to how each class and temperament might tackle a situation.

Hamstringing your party by leaving a class out is entirely up to quest design.

 

Forcing your way through everything without a Rogue should be an option. But in order to make the Rogue a class that deserves to exist, their skills must have a significant impact on the options available to you.

 

So to me the main thing is that all 3 archetypes have an equal purpose in the game, even if spellcasters are my preferred class. Playing a mage who has a spell for everything is a bit boring.

 

Overcoming obstacles is what games are about and it can't be too simple. Say there's a locked door you have to go through..

 

1) Your mage has an open lock spell, you cast it and go through. Wasn't really an obstacle at all.

2) Your mage has no Rogue friends. But you can smash the door into splinters with telekinetic force. This will alert the guards and might affect your reputation if you are seen or leave survivors.

3) Your mage has a mind control spell and there's a person with a key. You can force him to open the door for you, but he will remember this and you have to deal with a morally complex choice whether to kill him or not.

 

To me, options 2 and 3 are exponentially more interesting than option 1.

Edited September 20, 2012 by 1varangian

[The Dark One Avoozl]

A good example of a recent RPG that included your skill options into story parts was Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning. There was a Dispelling skill usually used gameplay wise to disenchant magic traps from chests. BUT if you put enough points into it and in the story met an NPC that was enchanted or mind controlled, you all of a sudden had the option to try and dispel the enchantment that has been put on the NPC avoiding a possible fight with him.

 

We don't have to be so 'locked' onto the Open spell example. That was an example. My point was the entire time that a characters skill or class choices actually mattered even to a small degree in the story of the game as that would raise the immersion rate far more. That's what makes PnP RPGs so fun, the way you use your skills is entirely up to you and I like that kind of freedom as it makes sense. It is logical that when I can throw a fireball in battle that I should be able to threaten someone with it storywise. As an example.

[Tale]

Fireballs are fine for storytelling, Tale. But your original posts indicated that a fireball is more in keeping with your vision of a Mage, which also implies your view of a mage as a combat unit rather than a person with a powerful and versatile talent, hence the idea that you were coming at it from the combat perspective I suppose.

My original post actually suggested teleporting past a door. Though I guess a sort of immaterial phasing through would work equally as well. Give him something new with its own drawbacks to express his versatility.

 

My point wasn't combat, it's that he doesn't need to take the Thief's schtick. It's okay to overlap with the warrior's approach to doors because that's the warrior's compromise, not one of his defining features.

[Entropious]

However, we should keep in mind that, should magic have so many usages, it should be very specialised and separated into different schools/sects and so forth. Otherwise, a mage will become a Swiss knife.

 

OR, as an alternative, one I have already posted elsewhere, the usage of magic should be dangerous both to the caster (in various ways) and those around him, which would at the same time give a could reason why people distrust and hate mages.

[The Dark One Avoozl]

Yeah but if you watch the currently available videos with info about the game they do want to make the game so you can get through it without using any companions at all. So a little swiss-army-knifing of the classes is to be expected if you can solo the game with each class on their own. Heck I personally want it like in Planescape: Torment where you could if you wanted to play through it without fighting at all and just talking your way out of everything.

[Rajaat the Warbringer]

I'm definitely a fan of magic having uses outside of battle.

[Naurgalen]

The thief allways has advantages vs a mage at lockpicking/trap detection/disarming

 

- He can stealth and lockpick at the same time

- Anti magic lockpicks or fields arent a hindrance

- Thiefs abilitys are more like infinite "free actions" while mages consume spells, drain fatigue/mana or whatever is the magic resource making him vulnerable

- Most mages wont detect a lockpick trap for thesecond and third reasons