Alternatives to Vancian or Cooldowns? Other suggestions?

[TrashMan]

If some don't like Vanacian and many don't like cooldowns, what then?

 

Here's an idea:

 

Fatigue

 

* EDIT: in case you havn't figured it out yet, red is health, green is morale *

 

Lets say your mage starts the day with 100 fatigue (or 1000.. higher numbers might be better for balancing and nuances)

 

He and the party go traveling. They've been on the road for 2 hours and the mages maximum fatigue has gone down, so now he's at 90/90.

 

Max fatigue goes down as the day goes by and as you do physicly demanding things (long journesy, running, etc..). Even if you don't cast any spells, you will need sleep.

 

So your group runs into some orcs. Battle starts. You launch a pretty powerfull spell that costs 15 fatigue. Roughly 10% of that costs is drawn from MAX fatigue. Your max fatigue has now dropped down to 88. However, your regular fatigue will regenerate by roughly 1 point per second. In 15 seconds the mage will be at 88/88. He can cast antoher spell immediately or wait.

 

Had he/she cast a less pwoerfull spell, the max fatigue would have been reduced only by 1 point. Either way, as time passes and the battles go on, the MAX fatigue drops. At 25% the character (any character, fighter or mage) becomes tired. It's harder to focus, but not by much. At 0% the characte is dead tired. He cna still continue to fight and move, but the penalties become severe. Miscasting becomesalmost a certanty.

 

The only way to recover MAX fatigue is by resting.

Yes resting.

 

Resting should be a part of any true RPG. It gives inns and villages a clear purpose. It is a safe haven to gather information, prepare, stock up, rest and heal.

 

 

I'd propose even healing to be very difficult. A natural and slow process. Healign spells don't heal fully - they give back only a small amount of HP (and a character cannot be healed over 50% wihout rest), but increase natural regeneration. - Note it would still take hours for critical wounds to heal. Without healing magic it might take days.

 

This even more gives a feelign of a real adventure and resource managment. Pulling back and regrouping becomes not onnly a valid tactic, but sometimes necessary (realistic, no?).

Also, leaving a wounded companion in the inn to recouperate while you take another companion with you for a while becomes an enticing prospect.

 

 

 

Personally, I'd rather have a few powerfull spells that I can't cast all of the time, and having to resort to a crossbow/staff/sword often enough, thanto have easily spammable low-level spells. That just sucks.

More like Gandalf, less like Hawke.

Edited October 2, 2012 by TrashMan

[rjshae]

Another approach would be to apply negative consequences of magic use. As you start rapidly firing off spells, you become a magic 'sink' (rather than a 'source') that draws in chaotic energies from the surroundings. You start acrueing penalties to your saving throws and, at some point, your spells suffer an increasing chance of a failure or even backfire. Continue down that road my friend and, rumor has it, you may even be swallowed whole by a vortex of chaotic energy.

 

The net effect of the accrued negative consequences is that Wizards will want to conserve their magic, using it only when necessary. Avoiding magic use gradually allows your body to return to normal, eliminating the penalties. Yes it's kind of a cool down system, but one that allows unlimited spell use... if you are willing to pay the price.

[NerdBoner]

yeah, i like the idea of magic being taxing on the body and mind through fatigue much more than spell cool-down and/or sleep memorization magic (vancian)...

 

i'd say go even further with it: for example, once a mage reaches a fatigue breaking point he can continue casting spells but suffers an increasingly higher % rate of outright death (or perhaps even insanity aka going berserk) by doing so. It will make you really have to pick your battles and whether or not the encounter is worth your life (especially if resurrection is difficult to come by - as it should be)

 

edit: fatigue beyond a certain point of course can only be removed through rest or perhaps a special ritual etc. (not cocaine stamina potions)

Edited October 2, 2012 by NerdBoner

[Luckmann]

...I think this is the 6th variation of this thread. Possibly 7th.

[PsychoBlonde]

I suggested a fatigue system of some kind in a thread about degenerate resting mechanics. Hmm, can I come up with another mechanic for spell limitation . . .

 

1. They could make all big spells be activated modes that have their effect over time, and you can only have so many of these going at once. Or, alternatively, just have it that the more of them you put up, the less effective they all are, so if you have 4 buffs running and try to throw up a damaging spell, the damage is going to be trivial and all your buffs are going to lose effectiveness.

 

2. They could make big spells/abilities be combos that result from you activating several things in a particular order. Or, that if you just fire off the ability, the result is very minor, but if you stand there charging it up over time the effect can be really powerful. Or even a combination of both, so if you want to cast, say, Plague of Insects, first you have to charge the "area effect" benefit, which lets you get more than one target, and then you have to charge the "swarm" effect, which gets you more damage, and then finally fire it off. This could actually be pretty interesting if one of the effects you can charge is "no friendly fire". This could be handled by having a little timer pop up over the caster's head with notices like "AOE CHARGE 2 REACHED!" or "SWARM CHARGE 4 REACHED!" Or you could set the autopause to go off either when you have a new charge available or when the maximum charge is available. So this could be manageable even with 6 characters. Plus this could have the additional amusing effect that if you have a sufficiently stealthy caster, they can sneak into a group of enemies, charge something up, and just nuke the ever-living crap out of them. Granted, if they notice your caster, that caster is MINCEMEAT.

 

3. They could make it so that using a given spell on an enemy has a good chance to make that enemy immune to further iterations of the same spell category--regardless of whether it actually affects them or not. So, a big splash spell MIGHT wipe out a group of enemies--or it MIGHT just make them all immune and force you to switch tactics.

 

4. They could have it that you must shift into a particular "form" in order to access the abilities tied to that form, and that switching between forms gives you a massive debuff for, like, 5 minutes.

Edited October 2, 2012 by PsychoBlonde

[Jandor]

I actually quite like a lot of the magic mechanics described in the opening post, especially how the max 'fatigue' (or whatever name they go for in the end) permanantly goes down until rest, but does regenerate up to the max that is left. Creates a very valid reason for Inns and stuff and stops people from just drinking potions and hammering through a 500 year old dungeon without stopping.

 

Still, I'll just throw my thoughts from the big cooldowns thread in here, why not eyh? Maybe they can mashed together for a system I would consider near perfect.

 

Just put the cooldowns at the start of the spell, "warm-ups" if you will. You're mage stands in place casting the spell for 10, 20, however many seconds, while it is casting it is draining mana (or whatever) and it can be interupted via damage.

 

You could also have it so before combat; possibly while resting, you can select a number of spells to 'pre-cast' so they can be instantly fired off. The amount of spells you can have ready to go straight away is dependent on how many points you put into that skill and the level of the spell prepared.

Do you set-up high some high damage spells so you can get your party out of trouble quickly? Or maybe have him prepare a magic shield instead so he can protect himself when he starts casting a big spell?

 

There you go, preperation before combat is a massive help, but if you prepared the "wrong" spells you're not instantly screwed.

[Umberlin]

Another approach would be to apply negative consequences of magic use. As you start rapidly firing off spells, you become a magic 'sink' (rather than a 'source') that draws in chaotic energies from the surroundings. You start acrueing penalties to your saving throws and, at some point, your spells suffer an increasing chance of a failure or even backfire. Continue down that road my friend and, rumor has it, you may even be swallowed whole by a vortex of chaotic energy.

 

The net effect of the accrued negative consequences is that Wizards will want to conserve their magic, using it only when necessary. Avoiding magic use gradually allows your body to return to normal, eliminating the penalties. Yes it's kind of a cool down system, but one that allows unlimited spell use... if you are willing to pay the price.

 

The problem with applying negative consequences to magic use is that then you need to apply a similar system to other action forms, such as a melee swing using up stamina that you're actually in danger of running out of, and, when out, your actions start taking health. If you don't then you end up with the very real, and very prevalent problem of magic users that can actually run themselve completely dry while your melee characters can just keep swinging away with no resource spent. Countless games actually suffer from there, where magic has a cost and other actions, quite simply, do not, or if they do then there's usually a sort of 'auto swing' or 'free swing' attack for them to use, that's quite effective, that magic users have to equivalent to.

 

You actually see a similar issue with ranged characters in games that limit them by ammo, as opposed to the ones that don't count the ammo. You have your ranged attack character in danger of running out of ammo, while the melee character, again, due to a flawed design, can swing away over and over and over ad infinitum ad nauseum with no cost, and often with quite large amounts of damage in games where magic weapons are more the deciding factor than the character's base stats.

 

I'm not going to say you have a bad idea, because you don't, it's an interesting idea, actually, but it's the sort of thing that you need to add 'something' for everyone, so everyone's potential for attack is kept in check, in order to facilitate the use of actual tactics. Just the same if magic can be interrupted and resources wasted (or a negative built up) then so too must other forms of attack be vulnerable to interruption and waste of a resource (or build up of some negative).

Edited October 2, 2012 by Umberlin

[Badmojo]

Another approach would be to apply negative consequences of magic use. As you start rapidly firing off spells, you become a magic 'sink' (rather than a 'source') that draws in chaotic energies from the surroundings. You start acrueing penalties to your saving throws and, at some point, your spells suffer an increasing chance of a failure or even backfire. Continue down that road my friend and, rumor has it, you may even be swallowed whole by a vortex of chaotic energy.

 

The net effect of the accrued negative consequences is that Wizards will want to conserve their magic, using it only when necessary. Avoiding magic use gradually allows your body to return to normal, eliminating the penalties. Yes it's kind of a cool down system, but one that allows unlimited spell use... if you are willing to pay the price.

 

The idea sounds interesting from an idea stand point, but it will suck playing it. I can already seeing all the posts from angry players complaining that their mage is getting damage from using their own magic and some just dissappeared!

 

I am also NOT a fan of limiting spell use a day, hey, I can only throw 3 spells of a certain type a day before it recharges or I need to sleep. Does fighers get to use their sword 3 times a day? Do thieves only get to use pickpocket/lockpicking 3 times a day? No, then stop trying to nerf mages.

 

I am not sure what the solution is, I like the idea of a vampiric type magic, where you recharge by sucking power from things. Like sucking life energy, or necro energy from dead/undead, perhaps even stealing souls to recharge if your evil.

 

 

 

How about a bank account type magic/skill system? Perhaps that is why so many people make pacts with gods/deities/demons/etc. Making a pact and you get access to a "bank" mana/power/spells/skills, etc (depending on your pact and being your pact with). You might have some type of quick cooldown but you do not run out of energy as long as your in good credit. BUT, you have a money/credit like account, the being expects you to do something for it every so often and do things to promote that beings point of view. As long as you do it, you build up mana/magic 'money' to use every day/quest..etc that you can use. However, each time you use it (magic/skill), you are using up credit/mana reserve in the 'bank'. When you run out, you start going on debt/credit. You are given a lttle time to pay off your 'debt' and build up your reserves again before the collectors come, however if you take too long or keep using your spells 'going into more debt', the being will appear (or send a represenative) and cut you off until you do a major quest for it, do several minor quests for it, or have some alternative way to pay it off. During this time when you have 'bad credit', you have to rest each day/quest to 'recharge' your magic.

[TrashMan]

The problem with applying negative consequences to magic use is that then you need to apply a similar system to other action forms, such as a melee swing using up stamina that you're actually in danger of running out of, and, when out, your actions start taking health. If you don't then you end up with the very real, and very prevalent problem of magic users that can actually run themselve completely dry while your melee characters can just keep swinging away with no resource spent. Countless games actually suffer from there, where magic has a cost and other actions, quite simply, do not, or if they do then there's usually a sort of 'auto swing' or 'free swing' attack for them to use, that's quite effective, that magic users have to equivalent to.

 

That's why I say every class has fatigue.

That doesn't mean that all classes would tire equally fast.

 

Technicly, you can have mages have both fatigue and mana. Mana is used for casting and regenerates (spell cost 20 mana, 2 fatigue) but it also lowers a bit of fatigue. Almost the same thing, except the source of magic is seperate. Why? Because if magic runs only on fatigue, wouldn't that be a CON score?

Or you could technicly have the max fatigue be a combination of INT/WIS and CON.

OR have everyone have a fatigue score of 100 (as in 100%) and have the rate of delpetion depends on CON/WIS or whatever.

 

Plenty of possiblities there.

 

 

It also depends how the setting explains magic. Normally I'd say that magic would be very taxing on the body.

 

But I'd really want to have powerfull magics.

The idea of lobbing of magical missiles constantly like in DA2 doesn't appeal to me at all. I'd rather have a dozen nuke spells and having to resort to using weapons occasioanly than that garbage.

 

 

You actually see a similar issue with ranged characters in games that limit them by ammo, as opposed to the ones that don't count the ammo. You have your ranged attack character in danger of running out of ammo, while the melee character, again, due to a flawed design, can swing away over and over and over ad infinitum ad nauseum with no cost, and often with quite large amounts of damage in games where magic weapons are more the deciding factor than the character's base stats.

 

That's not flawed desing.

Bows do use ammo. Swords don't.

 

An archer should stock up before going on a longer expedition, he should collect arrows, repair broken ones if possible. And he always has his backup weapons.

An archer can use a sword you know...

[TrashMan]

I am also NOT a fan of limiting spell use a day, hey, I can only throw 3 spells of a certain type a day before it recharges or I need to sleep. Does fighers get to use their sword 3 times a day? Do thieves only get to use pickpocket/lockpicking 3 times a day? No, then stop trying to nerf mages.

 

Nerfing? Mages were GODS in D&D.

 

And again, they always have fallback methods..wands, scrolls and weapons. Mages aren't incompetent.

[DocDoomII]

I personally dislike such a parametric value for fatigue, because it's too much like mana (and I don't like it).

I'd like something akin to the sorcerer from Baldur's Gate 2.

You have a fixed amount of 'casting' until the next time you sleep. Leveling up would add to the max number of castings you can do.

I'd spice up a little the system with TrashMan idea and add that walking for prolonged times in the 'wild' and doing particular tasks could decrease the amount of castings left.

I'd add that the more powerful spells could cost more casting units that lower level spells.

 

I'd also like to be able to copy spells from my spell books to scrolls so to have a reasonable reserve during emergency. Obviously creating such copies should require special items/work places, so you can't just produce them in a dungeon.

Also the ability to rip a spell from a book and use it if I'm totally at the end of the rope could be interesting. This action would clearly remove said spell from your spell book.

 

 

But I know I'm reasoning too much with the Infinity Engine implementation of mages and spells.

Edited October 2, 2012 by DocDoomII

[duskwind]

The problem with applying negative consequences to magic use is that then you need to apply a similar system to other action forms, such as a melee swing using up stamina that you're actually in danger of running out of, and, when out, your actions start taking health. If you don't then you end up with the very real, and very prevalent problem of magic users that can actually run themselve completely dry while your melee characters can just keep swinging away with no resource spent.

 

I don't see that as a problem; magic should be a great deal more powerful than hitting people with bits of metal, so it needs to be limited in other ways. Personally I like the warmup idea, with more powerful spells taking longer to cast.

[Jandor]

My thoughts.

 

I like Trashmans fatigue idea, I'd call it mana or soul energy or something, but the idea is good. I'd combine it with casting times for spells (cooldowns in reverse if you like) and a limited ability to prepare ahead of time.

 

Basically, casting a spell drains mana temporarily, say 3 points for a level 1 spells, but also lowers your max limit, by say 1 point for a level 1 spell.

So you start with 10 mana points and you cast a level one spell, you are now down to 7 points that will regenerate up to a max of 9, level 1 spells for the sake of argument take 10 seconds to cast. However, you could choose to pre-prepare for encounters instead by having your mage ready a level 1 spell, this lowers your max mana by 3 instead of 1 but casts instantaneously and requires only 1 mana to unleash.

 

Your ability to ready spells ahead of time, your max mana, how fast it regenerates, etc. would be dependant on how you attribute your stats when you level up. You could create a mage that can unleash a torrent of deadly spells quickly but is very inflexible in how they can approach encounters due to spending most of their mana on preparation, or you could focus on creating a versatile mage that would require longer in battle to reach their full potential but can deal with many different threats. Or a mix of both, focus on creating a mage that can erect some defenses quickly at the start of battle to give them a buffer to cast more offense-centric spells later.

 

The numbers above are obviously very very rough.

 

Edit: Forgot to mention, obviously like in the OP mana would reset back to max upon resting.

 

Edit 2: A fatigue bar could also still exist, it would be much the same sort of thing as a mana bar but for more physical classes. Mages would also have one to but it probably wouldn't get much use unless they had completely drained their mana. Fighters and rogues, etc, could also have a mana bar depending on just how common magic is in the setting.

Edited October 2, 2012 by Jandor

[Umberlin]

The problem with applying negative consequences to magic use is that then you need to apply a similar system to other action forms, such as a melee swing using up stamina that you're actually in danger of running out of, and, when out, your actions start taking health. If you don't then you end up with the very real, and very prevalent problem of magic users that can actually run themselve completely dry while your melee characters can just keep swinging away with no resource spent.

 

I don't see that as a problem; magic should be a great deal more powerful than hitting people with bits of metal,

 

Then you aren't familiar with how most games, especially modern games, handle magic damage verus melee damage. There are exceptions, but the typical design flaw is that they'll give the melee a free attack or a no cost auto-attack or the like, that can do a sizeable portion of damage based on the weapon they're using, this becomes especially problematic with magical weapons because the result is typically that the weapon does a great mass of damage comparable, or even greater than, a spell that has a high cost or that can only be used X amount of times per day.

 

Essentially what I'm saying is that everything has to have a cost, cost for effort, expendature or build up of a negative. Risk for reward via the resources spent through the effort that could potentially be interrupted. If it applies to one form of combat it must apply to all, otherwise you end up with that guy that can just keep swinging and swinging and swinging with no cost.

 

I'll go back to the earlier example of how that applies outside of magic. You have a ranged character, limited ammunition, this is as it should be right? Well I think it is. But then you'll come across the flaw in all to many games where a melee character can just come in and use a decent to high damage attack or skill over and over and over again, without cost I must again add, while every other form of combatant on the field has to deal with the reality of finite resources. The Mage has limited spells per day or limited mana or what have you. The Ranged combatant has limited ammo and so on.

 

If done right the melee combatant too has a finite resource that can run out, like stamina, or whatever floats your boat. If done wrong the melee combatant has a free attack or costless auto-attack that they can use forever, without end. And wrong way happens 'all the time' because that free attack or costless auto-attack general depends more on the damage of a weapon, especially magical weapons, leading to them dealing impressive damage, for free, when everyone else on the field has a cost associated with that brand of damage.

 

It's a matter of balance, because, what do you want in your group, as far as companions go? A bunch of characters that can run out of a resource? Or a bunch of characters with a free high damage attack they can spam constantly? It may sound like an impossible mistake to make, but it happens all the time, because you end up with those Fighter or Warrior characters that, even if they have a resource to spend on special attacks, will almost always have that free swing that doesn't cost a thing, while everyone else is expending casts per day or ammo or mana or whatever resource you please.

 

"If" magic deals much more damage, you have a point, but, especially modern games, balance out the damage so everyone is about the same, meaning the guy with that no cost attack? He's the companion you want because he will never run out. It's a problem in so many games because you can make a party of those sorts of characters and steamroll content with little risk and high free of cost damage.

 

Obviously, yes, some games do get it right. I'm just pointing out that if one form has a cost, all forms must have a cost, simply because I'd feel amiss if I didn't after seeing so many studious make this mistake for . . . reasons I can't fathom. Give magic a major drawback? Is it similar in damage/effect to other forms? Then either the drawback/cost needs removed or all the other forms need simialr costs and drawbacks. Is it higher damage/effect than other forms? Then there's wiggle room, but I'd still maintain that 'no' action, regardless of form, should be free.

Edited October 2, 2012 by Umberlin

[duskwind]

Then you aren't familiar with how most games, especially modern games, handle magic damage verus melee damage. There are exceptions, but the typical design flaw is that they'll give the melee a free attack or a no cost auto-attack or the like, that can do a sizeable portion of damage based on the weapon they're using, this becomes especially problematic with magical weapons because the result is typically that the weapon does a great mass of damage comparable, or even greater than, a spell that has a high cost or that can only be used X amount of times per day.

 

I'm aware that's how most games do it, and I don't like it. Melee fighters should do relatively low damage but without cost, while ranged attacks should be limited but powerful; an arrow should be pretty much undodgeable for all but the most dextrous high level characters, and potentially do a lot of damage. And ranged combatants have the advantage of being able to damage the enemy while remaining safely out of reach of melee weapons themselves (depending on the layout of the battleground). Ranged combatants that can run out of ammo should be capable of switching to melee, though less effectively than dedicated melee fighters; I think this makes more sense for archers than mages, so I'd recommend against a system that lets mages run out of power entirely (eg the Vancian system).

[Umberlin]

Then you aren't familiar with how most games, especially modern games, handle magic damage verus melee damage. There are exceptions, but the typical design flaw is that they'll give the melee a free attack or a no cost auto-attack or the like, that can do a sizeable portion of damage based on the weapon they're using, this becomes especially problematic with magical weapons because the result is typically that the weapon does a great mass of damage comparable, or even greater than, a spell that has a high cost or that can only be used X amount of times per day.

 

I'm aware that's how most games do it, and I don't like it. Melee fighters should do relatively low damage but without cost, while ranged attacks should be limited but powerful; an arrow should be pretty much undodgeable for all but the most dextrous high level characters, and potentially do a lot of damage. And ranged combatants have the advantage of being able to damage the enemy while remaining safely out of reach of melee weapons themselves (depending on the layout of the battleground). Ranged combatants that can run out of ammo should be capable of switching to melee, though less effectively than dedicated melee fighters; I think this makes more sense for archers than mages, so I'd recommend against a system that lets mages run out of power entirely (eg the Vancian system).

 

Well yeah, obviously the things you're better trained in you'd be better at. I definitly agree on the part that they'd be able to switch, with the obvious note that the limitations of their character progression choices, thus far, would be upon them.

 

I think this makes more sense for archers than mages, so I'd recommend against a system that lets mages run out of power entirely (eg the Vancian system).

 

I'm going to catch a little flack, maybe, for what I'm about to say, or maybe it's just the fact that I really dislike the game I'm about to mention . . . but one thing Dragon Age 2 did right was the Staff attacks that used the staff as a secondary power source for attacks beyond their spell casting. The only thing I'd have changed about that would have been that it is . . . again . . . "Unlimited" and I really don't feel any form of combat should have an unlimited option. I'd go back to the D&D Wizard Staff/Wand or equivalents from other settings that offered magic users a secondary option beyond their spells 'if' and only if that secondary option was also somehow limited.

 

For example a wand that could hold one type of spell, that slow regenerated charges (too slowly to just spam constantly) in combination with the memorization styled spell list or what have you. This is actually something you could potentially have in D&D so it's not really different except that I'm proposing the Wand/Staff act as a focus DA2 style for a particular type/form of attack spells unique to wand/staff (or whatever brand of focus) weapons that sort of have their own internal mana bar or charge limitation or what have you. As long as it's limited and slow enough they can't just spam the bloody things. I'm a fan of limitations when it comes to the expendature of effort/resources/whatever in exchange for an action in an RPG. I feel strongly that it's the thing that spurs on real tactical thinking.

 

Of course what I just mentioned is way, way to simple and too rushed to be of any use. Someone a lot more dedicated than I would have to flesh it out into something viable, and, really, by that time, I'd hope they could just plain come up with something far, far better on their own because I am reaching on this one.

[Nixl]

I posted this in the cooldown thread, but personally I think a hybrid system would have advantages. By hybrid system, I mean a mix of cooldowns and memorization. Give weak spells cooldowns and medium and/or strong spells memorization requirements. I believe cooldown vs memorization spells would bring an interesting balance point to the combat. A cooldown spell may have infinite uses, but it is much weaker than a memorization spell and vice versa.

 

Furthermore, I think both cooldown and memorization systems have pros and cons. I do believe a hybrid system could potentially bring together the pros and eliminate the cons if done well. Then again, anything done well is going to work lol.

[Gorth]

Let them eat experience points...

 

If you want to put a serious strain on your soul (which presumably powers "magic"), let it come at a cost that cripples magic wielders that are over reliant on their "gifts". I seem to remember some different approaches in one of the updates, like rituals and flesh mortification to wring out that extra energy of your soul. Wouldn't be surprise me if they came up with not one, but several alternatives to fuel such stuff coming with different downsides, depending on your chose flavour of magic.

[nikolokolus]

Soul sickness, fatigue, burnout, radiation sic ... er, forget that last one. Whatever you want to call it, I think it might be feasible to have a system that progressively saps your characters willpower, strength, or whatever the more spells you use. I sort of envision a meter (call it soul strength ... or preferably something much better) and use a scale of -100 to 100. As you cast spells they get increasingly weaker as a caster uses up their strength, higher level spells do it quicker and once you get to zero you don't lose the ability to cast spells but you start compounding negative effects on top of your character that can't be removed with normal standing around, they need true bed rest or some kind of supernatural restorative to remove. If you reach -100 your character dies ... hell maybe they even become a zombie, I don't know, I haven't quite worked out the details, this just occurred to me a few minutes ago ...

[Ieo]

I want them all.

 

Chosen spell slots + cooldowns + rest mechanic + mana/power + fatigue + SOUL!

 

I want some awesome new and original union that covers their combined weaknesses and blows away everything, rolled up into a tight curl of bacon with brown sugar and chipotle powder and baked to perfection at 400 degrees oh it must be dinnertime I must be going now tally-ho...

[Gatt9]

We're circling around an issue much more basic that needs to be discussed before it's really worthwhile to even try to have these higher level discussions.

 

Group 1: "I believe my Mage should be active at all times in combat, and he should be using Magic to attack, not a physicial weapon.

 

Group 2: "I believe my Mage should be something that turns the tide in battle through comparitively large effects, but is limited in the number of times he can do it".

 

Group 2a: As above but, "I'm not a fan of being unable to choose my spell on the spot, but rather guessing what I'll want ahead of time" (Mana)

 

This is what the arguement boils down to. People whose issue is "Rest spamming" fall into group 1. People whose issue is Reloading are in either Group 1 or Group 2a. Vancian people are in Group 2.

 

If this arguement is to progress, we need to resolve this first. The arguement is how people perceive Mages should play, and without resolving that discussion, it's really pointless to keep trying to have any other higher level discussion on implementation.

[Jaesun]

Or it could just be as similar as it was in the IE games. That's why we liked it.

[Lohi]

The problem with applying negative consequences to magic use is that then you need to apply a similar system to other action forms, such as a melee swing using up stamina that you're actually in danger of running out of,

I agree. But so many players here are so rabidly opposed to this it seems. I don't understand it really, maybe D&D is a religion and we're not allowed to dislike it? Many players seem to think that magic users are supposed to be special, held in reserve, using that one awesome spell at just the right time to save the day. That seems boring. Let the mage do something useful in all the fights I say, if they're restricted then all classes should have restrictions, if they have advantages then all classes should have advantages.

 

This is not some corrupting influence from MMOs, this is just common sense of having the classes be roughly equal. D&D was an early primitive form of RPG, the "role playing" part was really really new and it was just an extension of wargaming with miniatures. There was no attempt to balance classes. You were supposed to create a party of unbalanced characters that worked together. The working together part is great, however the unbalanced part is not. Fighter is always useful, mage however starts out as useless and over time becomes somewhat useful, and eventually extremely overpowered.

 

Since then we have come up with point based systems. You have a fixed set of points and design a character around that. If the game system developers did it right they have roughly equivalent usefulness (in a pen-and-paper way at least, maybe not equivalent in combat in a computer game). Maybe they're not all perfect either but they point the way towards balancing off different types of characters all of which are roughly equal in usefulness.

 

Therefore, if a mage has to rest after using a certain number of actions, then it is only fair that a fighter do this also. If a ranger can shoot 20 arrows in a row, then it is only fair that a mage be able to shoot the equivalent amount of damage.

 

Here's my main problem with games like BG1/BG2/etc. If you are in a simple fight the mage does nothing. Because it's a waste to use your limited number of spells on kobolds. Just send in the fighters. So I just leave the mages standing there twiddling their thumbs until there's a tough fight. This is boring! And it's completely unfair that some classes get to have fun because they have no restriction on the number of actions that they can do during the day.

 

I think the GURPS system uses fatigue for spells. It seems pretty reasonable. You use too many and you're drained. Melee attacks use up fatigue too, it's equivalent that way. But you can rest up and be ok, and you can rest up in much less than 8 hours. Mages in GURPS aren't narcoleptics.

 

You actually see a similar issue with ranged characters in games that limit them by ammo, as opposed to the ones that don't count the ammo.

Yes this is true. I notice in BG1 that before I added the convenience mod to let me stack arrows that I was trying to conserve them and use melee more... However I have had a melee character break swords in BG1 as well.

 

I am confused why some people will criticize this problem for ranged and melee attacks as being too inconvenient, and yet also defend even harsher limitations on magic use.

[Lohi]

Or it could just be as similar as it was in the IE games. That's why we liked it.

These were the things I disliked the most in IE games. I like the games themselves, but I did not like the D&D game system or it's magic rules. These were things I tolerated.

[Lohi]

I am not sure what the solution is,

There's the middle earth solution, where magic is very rare and player characters don't get to use it... Not sure how well that would go over )