Transformation Spell Please

[trulez]

Transformation - Morphs the player to look like the target of the spell. This would let Mages do what Rogues do but in a completely different way.

 

Want to get past that guard at the gate ?

Rogue: Sneak

Mage: Morph into a guard and walk past

 

Want to convince that quest NPC to give up cricital information ?

Rogue: Diplomacy

Mage: Morph into his friend and ask him

 

Want to open that locked chest in the backroom of the inn ?

Rogue: Picklock

Mage: Morph into the owner of the inn and ask for the key

 

This would open up ALOT of different options on how to play the game, and how to influence the world around you.

[Caerdon]

Sounds great, but making that work would take a crazy amount of resources just for one class.

[metiman]

Rather than a mage, you'd probably want an entirely separate class. A shapeshifter. Balancing a creature that powerful may be difficult though.

[OldRPG'sAreGood]

Wouldn't it be simpler just to implement a transformation spell that turns the mage into an animal with fitting stats? For example, when sneaking past a guard, just transform to a rat or a cat or the like.

 

So instead of situation specific transformations, there'd a spell for a stat change(with a change in the appearance as well) with what to succeed in, for example, sneaking.

[Luckmann]

No.

 

This reminds me of the precise problem with mages in 3.5: Anything anyone can do, a mage can do better. No one class should be able to fulfil all roles.

[Volourn]

Sorry. But a mage is about magic. Magic, by definition, should be beyond mortal abilties. Check any pnp game with magic - can pretty much cover any situation with magic. As it should be. This desire for classes to be equal in power is silly.

 

Of course, CRPG gamers are known for their silly desire for 'balance' and 'equality'. So, might as well nerff mages and not make them mages at all.

[Tale]

Sorry. But a mage is about magic. Magic, by definition, should be beyond mortal abilties.

Magic, by definition, should be apart from normal abilities. Above, beyond, below is arbitrary. It just needs to be different.

[Luckmann]

Sorry. But a mage is about magic. Magic, by definition, should be beyond mortal abilties. Check any pnp game with magic - can pretty much cover any situation with magic. As it should be. This desire for classes to be equal in power is silly.

 

Of course, CRPG gamers are known for their silly desire for 'balance' and 'equality'. So, might as well nerff mages and not make them mages at all.

PnP:s are administrated by a Game Master that can make on-the-fly adjustments for all involved, presenting scenarios beyond RAW in order to balance the general gameplay between all the characters in the game.

 

A CRPG has no such luxury, unless you happen to be hiding an AI in those fluffy pockets of yours, Volourn.

[Umberlin]

I suppose illusions or transformations, as spells, if regulated just right, that allows you to temporarily pass a some brand of NPC would, essentially, just be a stealth skill with a slight visual difference. The real issue would be in interacting with NPCs in this state, as, if they don't react right, it would seem off. As such whether something like this should be in, or not, seems like it would be best left to the question: "Is it practical given the time and resources alotted?"

 

Obsidian are the only ones that can really answer that, so, whatever they decide on something like that is fine by me. If it can be worked in, and work right, great. If not, then oh well.

[Cryticus]

God , please, no, mages are already shown as high damage dealers, and tide turners of battle, giving them another abillity to make them better sneak character than sneak characters , also argument that magic is extordinary is stupid by that logic mages should be immortal best fighters , best thiefs, best at everything, and also immortal

[metiman]

Posing as a friend requires more than taking his form. It would require knowledge to be convincing.

 

As far as mages needing to be all powerful because they use magic remember that the enemy mages will be just as powerful and there will be more of them. Your enemies will also have your shapeshifting ability. How will you feel when all of a sudden you can't distinguish your party members from your enemies because they look and act identically...until they attack.

 

If your companions and your enemies become indistinguishable it also means that, to be fair, you would have to lose tactical control over your companions during combat. If you can fool enemies they should be able to fool you too. And being able to move and command your allies would give away the illusion. You wouldn't even know for sure when a party member dies or when you kill your own party member thinking they are the enemy.

[Umberlin]

God , please, no, mages are already shown as high damage dealers, and tide turners of battle, giving them another abillity to make them better sneak character than sneak characters , also argument that magic is extordinary is stupid by that logic mages should be immortal best fighters , best thiefs, best at everything, and also immortal

 

I'm getting this sort of a vibe from your post:

 

"There is only one type of Magic user, they're all evocation specialists that throw fireballs. Magic users specialized in Transmutation style magics, Illusion style magics, Enchantment style magics, Divinination style magics and many other styles of magical application do not exist, and never have existed, and because of the existence of one style of high damage magic user none of these other types should exist."

 

Correct me if that was not the vibe you wished me to get. I'm not even for the idea particularly, I just think . . . there's something amiss in your view of magic users.

Edited September 29, 2012 by Umberlin

[Cryticus]

God , please, no, mages are already shown as high damage dealers, and tide turners of battle, giving them another abillity to make them better sneak character than sneak characters , also argument that magic is extordinary is stupid by that logic mages should be immortal best fighters , best thiefs, best at everything, and also immortal

 

I'm getting this sort of a vibe from your post:

 

"There is only one type of Magic user, they're all evocation specialists that throw fireballs. Magic users specialized in Transmutation style magics, Illusion style magics, Enchantment style magics, Divinination style magics and many other styles of magical application do not exist, and never have existed, and because of the existence of one style of high damage magic user none of these other types should exist."

 

Correct me if that was not the vibe you wished me to get. I'm not even for the idea particularly, I just think . . . there's something amiss in your view of magic users.

 

Nope, what I mean is that in crpgs and even in normal rpgs, no class should make other class obsolit, mage my practice illusion, mage my practice destruction, mage my practice conjuration, the thing is to make them orginal so that illusion mage can not do everything better and more than thief

Edited September 29, 2012 by Cryticus

[Badmojo]

God , please, no, mages are already shown as high damage dealers, and tide turners of battle, giving them another abillity to make them better sneak character than sneak characters , also argument that magic is extordinary is stupid by that logic mages should be immortal best fighters , best thiefs, best at everything, and also immortal

 

I'm getting this sort of a vibe from your post:

 

"There is only one type of Magic user, they're all evocation specialists that throw fireballs. Magic users specialized in Transmutation style magics, Illusion style magics, Enchantment style magics, Divinination style magics and many other styles of magical application do not exist, and never have existed, and because of the existence of one style of high damage magic user none of these other types should exist."

 

Correct me if that was not the vibe you wished me to get. I'm not even for the idea particularly, I just think . . . there's something amiss in your view of magic users.

 

Nope, what I mean is that in crpgs and even in normal rpgs, no class should make other class obsolit, mage my practice illusion, mage my practice destruction, mage my practice conjuration, the thing is to make them orginal so that illusion mage can not do everything better and more than thief

 

It isn't better, its just different styles to solve the same problem. Some might go rambo, some might pickpocket and take the key, some might do a quest to get the key, some might bluff their way into getting the key, some might morph into the owner and trick them into getting the key.

[zlarm]

If you wanted to implement that sort of thing properly you'd probably need to do the whole game about it i.e. the only class you can choose is a mage who can shapechange. Theres no way they could assign that many resources to one class.

[Waywocket]

 

Nope, what I mean is that in crpgs and even in normal rpgs, no class should make other class obsolit, mage my practice illusion, mage my practice destruction, mage my practice conjuration, the thing is to make them orginal so that illusion mage can not do everything better and more than thief

 

To an extent, this is what a vancian [i've never heard it called that before, but that seems to be the term all the cool kids are using] magic system is there to prevent - your mage can cast invisibility if he has it prepared, but you thief can be stealthy at will. The mage has great power and versatility, tempered by moderation - if you prepare that transformation, that's one less fireball. If you cast it now, you can't cast it later today. You have great power at your disposal, but you need to be careful where/when/how you use it.

 

That's why I like that kind of system, and I'm sad that it seems to be fairly unpopular even here, because going to something like a mana-based system means that either mages need to be nerfed to the point that they're far less fun to play, or they're so overpowered compared to the other classes that it's silly to pick anything else. I don't think I've ever played a game where the mage worked as well as in BG2 (not BG1 because you spend too much of the game so pathetic that you're almost useless, nor ToB where the mage really started to outstrip the other classes too much).

[Umberlin]

Nope, what I mean is that in crpgs and even in normal rpgs, no class should make other class obsolit, mage my practice illusion, mage my practice destruction, mage my practice conjuration, the thing is to make them orginal so that illusion mage can not do everything better and more than thief

 

To an extent, this is what a vancian [i've never heard it called that before, but that seems to be the term all the cool kids are using] magic system is there to prevent - your mage can cast invisibility if he has it prepared, but you thief can be stealthy at will. The mage has great power and versatility, tempered by moderation - if you prepare that transformation, that's one less fireball. If you cast it now, you can't cast it later today. You have great power at your disposal, but you need to be careful where/when/how you use it.

 

That's why I like that kind of system, and I'm sad that it seems to be fairly unpopular even here, because going to something like a mana-based system means that either mages need to be nerfed to the point that they're far less fun to play, or they're so overpowered compared to the other classes that it's silly to pick anything else. I don't think I've ever played a game where the mage worked as well as in BG2 (not BG1 because you spend too much of the game so pathetic that you're almost useless, nor ToB where the mage really started to outstrip the other classes too much).

 

This is fairly accurate. The Thief can stealth at will, the Wizard (under that system at least) has to prepare, and if he hasn't prepared it . . . he doesn't have it. That's one of the most intriguing things about a well played Wizard actually, the tactical approach and prior planning involved (unless a game does something silly like letting you just constantly rest rendering it entirely pointless :\ ).