Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

BG2 and IE games in general had an amazingly large and varied spell list, BG2 is easily the best spellcaster game ever made, with the "mage duels" one of the most memorable and fun parts of the game. I think that a true spiritual successor game should give extra attention to the spell system with a variety of  diffirent effects, damage types and protections.

I don't believe that they will manage to rival BG2 in this area, but it would be good if they could do it. Josh worked on IWD2 and Tim made Arcanum. If anyone can make a spell system to rival D&D are those two

Edited by Malekith
  • Like 1
Posted

I think they could rival BG2, with some help from the community. But it's not anything to bet on perhaps.

To be able to make more spells swiftly and simplified, I wouldn't mind it if Obsidian copy+pasted some spell animations, changed the hue/texture and mechanic effects a little bit. They could easily do 5 different spells using 1 spell animation this way (practically 5-in-1).

Posted (edited)

Yes the BG2 spell list was large and varied, but didn't most of us end up just using about 20% of the spells? Changing spells was a time-consuming process, so it was usually better to pick the most useful ones and occasionally tweak situational-specific spells (like invisibility purge/see invisibility vs. the sirens).

 

It might be interesting if the magic system had a counter-mechanic for overuse of specific spells. Say, if you cast magic missile all the time, then your magical link to that pattern grew worn and the spell became weakened.

 

Another approach would be to have fewer magical patterns (spells) but many variants. You learn one of those variants to start with, then gradually expand your repertoire and learn to adjust it situationally. For example, your magic missiles could acquire knockback capability, delayed activation, elemental aspects, morale-lowering shrieking sounds, and so forth.

Edited by rjshae

"It has just been discovered that research causes cancer in rats."

Posted
  On 1/23/2013 at 3:41 PM, rjshae said:

Yes the BG2 spell list was large and varied, but didn't most of us end up just using about 20% of the spells? Changing spells was a time-consuming process, so it was usually better to pick the most useful ones and occasionally tweak situational-specific spells (like invisibility purge/see invisibility vs. the sirens).

There are just so many moments in a game with friendly fire where you'll pick Haste over Fireball, not to mention Lightning Bolt. So yeah I think they could do better than vanilla DnD.
Posted
  On 1/23/2013 at 3:41 PM, rjshae said:

Yes the BG2 spell list was large and varied, but didn't most of us end up just using about 20% of the spells? Changing spells was a time-consuming process, so it was usually better to pick the most useful ones and occasionally tweak situational-specific spells (like invisibility purge/see invisibility vs. the sirens).

Yes but the most usefull one varied from person to person. You could make a purely offensive mage, pure defence, crowd control, a summoner, a mixed one. All valable choices, and the system gave you many options.

  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
  On 1/23/2013 at 3:41 PM, rjshae said:

Yes the BG2 spell list was large and varied, but didn't most of us end up just using about 20% of the spells? Changing spells was a time-consuming process, so it was usually better to pick the most useful ones and occasionally tweak situational-specific spells (like invisibility purge/see invisibility vs. the sirens).

 

Multiple Playthroughs, one game you go 20%, another you go another 20%. It also gives a ton of ways to get varied, allows the Player to experiment (there might even be some spells designed to be "worse" than another spell, just to make the Player feel "Good" about his choice). It allows the Developers to make a game where Players/Gamers can play like they want to play as well.

 

Several "Profession" thoughts and Faction thoughts goes into that bin as well, in my opinon (other threads~Campfire thread, Different Paths thread) (Only experiencing 20% on one playthrough, and another 20% on another playthrough). 

Edited by Osvir
  • Like 1
Posted

We should start thinking about merging some of these threads now too. :)

 

Maybe folks could submit 2 lists here. One list of spells they used most frequently, and another list of spells that were rarely or never used. And tell us why.

 

Off the top of my head, in IWD2 in the Ice Temple, I'd cast Improved Invisibility on my Sorcerer, sneak into a room full of Ice Trolls, then take them out with Sunfire. Oh, the satisfaction!

 

Spells I was least likely to use were the ones that didn't scale with level, like Minor Mirror Image, Summon Monster I, and most spells with the keyword "Minor" in them. I have other suggestions for both lists. Just need to take time and go back over them all.

Me? I'm dishonest, and a dishonest man you can always trust to be dishonest. Honestly. It's the honest ones you want to watch out for.

 

Posted
  On 1/23/2013 at 6:03 PM, Sharp_one said:

 

  On 1/23/2013 at 3:52 PM, Malekith said:

 

  On 1/23/2013 at 3:41 PM, rjshae said:

Yes the BG2 spell list was large and varied, but didn't most of us end up just using about 20% of the spells? Changing spells was a time-consuming process, so it was usually better to pick the most useful ones and occasionally tweak situational-specific spells (like invisibility purge/see invisibility vs. the sirens).

Yes but the most usefull one varied from person to person. You could make a purely offensive mage, pure defence, crowd control, a summoner, a mixed one. All valable choices, and the system gave you many options.

 

Sure you can...if you have a second mage who has all the REQUIRED spells (dispel, breach etc.) because without them you cannot win a battle with any Mage.

Which brings me to my opinion, it would be cool if a Mage could sustain only one passive defensive spell. Like in Mage:Ascension. That way Mage defense would be a tactical option rather than a required combination of 15 spells activated by spell sequencer.  

For example: expecting a raid on goblins with a lot of archers -> protection against arrows. Mage fight -> spell ward or energy shield. It's lame when you face an enemy Mage who is protected from everything and who can recast all his protections 3 times.

I disagree with this. I would prefer layers of multiple defences

Posted (edited)

They've already talked about certain modal abilities disallowing other modal abilities. I wonder if this was in regards to spells or something else. I've listed each spell and marked if commonly used (1), sometimes used (2), used once (3), never used (4) in spoilers below. I've added a blank template at the bottom (see last spoiler) so others can copy paste and do the same.

 

The convention is to put the number 1-4 in front of the spell. In case, this becomes interesting for someone to take all the data and put it in an excel sheet, it would be easy because it's the first character for each spell.

 

e.g. Armor -> 1Armor (often used)

Blindness -> 4Blindess (rarely used)

 

To get the template, reply to my message, then click on the top left button (looks like a switch) to switch to code mode. Then scroll all the way down, You can delete this introductory stuff and then edit the last spoiler by adding your numbers in front.

 

Arcane Spells Level 1

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

Arcane Spells Level 2

  Reveal hidden contents

 

Arcane Spells Level 3

  Reveal hidden contents

 

Arcane Spells Level 4

  Reveal hidden contents

 

Arcane Spells Level 5

  Reveal hidden contents

Arcane Spells Level 6

  Reveal hidden contents

 

Arcane Spells Level 7

  Reveal hidden contents

 

Arcane Spells Level 8

  Reveal hidden contents

 

Arcane Spells Level 9

  Reveal hidden contents

 

Arcane Spells Level 10

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

Edited by Hormalakh
  • Like 2

My blog is where I'm keeping a record of all of my suggestions and bug mentions.

http://hormalakh.blogspot.com/  UPDATED 9/26/2014

My DXdiag:

http://hormalakh.blogspot.com/2014/08/beta-begins-v257.html

Posted


Arcane Spells Level 1

  Reveal hidden contents


Arcane Spells Level 2

  Reveal hidden contents


Arcane Spells Level 3

  Reveal hidden contents


Arcane Spells Level 4

  Reveal hidden contents


Arcane Spells Level 5

  Reveal hidden contents


Arcane Spells Level 6

  Reveal hidden contents


Arcane Spells Level 7

  Reveal hidden contents


Arcane Spells Level 8

  Reveal hidden contents


Arcane Spells Level 9

  Reveal hidden contents


Arcane Spells Level 10

  Reveal hidden contents

 

  • Like 1
Posted (edited)

Arcane Spells Level 1

  Reveal hidden contents


Arcane Spells Level 2

  Reveal hidden contents


Arcane Spells Level 3

  Reveal hidden contents


Arcane Spells Level 4

  Reveal hidden contents


Arcane Spells Level 5

  Reveal hidden contents


Arcane Spells Level 6

  Reveal hidden contents



Looks like I haven't gotten to Level 7 or higher in Baldur's Gate yet :p

Edited by Osvir
Posted

The more spells the better, as long as they aren't simply stronger versions of one another.

I don't want an improved invisibility spell, just allow me to improve my spellcasting overall.

And I don't really want spells that are only slightly different, like say a camouflage spell that is more effective outdoors than an invisibility spell which works better indoors or something.

 

But different spell shields are cool, one for deflecting spells, one for melee damage, one for projectile damage.

  • Like 2
Posted

I wouldn't mind seeing a different approach to meta-magic than is used in D&D 3e. A spell is, in a sense an effect applied with a set of properties. Why can't I fiddle with those properties and enhance it in some manner while diminishing it in another? If I want to cast it silently, I could reduce the casting level, increase the casting time, diminish the effectiveness, make it cost an extra spell slot, or adjust some other factor.

"It has just been discovered that research causes cancer in rats."

Posted

Sure, why not. A lot of this is from memory though.

 

Arcane Spells Level 1

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

Arcane Spells Level 2

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

Arcane Spells Level 3

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

Arcane Spells Level 4

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

Arcane Spells Level 5

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

Arcane Spells Level 6

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

Arcane Spells Level 7

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

Arcane Spells Level 8

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

Arcane Spells Level 9

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

Arcane Spells Level 10

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

Posted
  On 1/23/2013 at 1:46 PM, Malekith said:

BG2 and IE games in general had an amazingly large and varied spell list, BG2 is easily the best spellcaster game ever made, with the "mage duels" one of the most memorable and fun parts of the game. I think that a true spiritual successor game should give extra attention to the spell system with a variety of  diffirent effects, damage types and protections.

I don't believe that they will manage to rival BG2 in this area, but it would be good if they could do it. Josh worked on IWD2 and Tim made Arcanum. If anyone can make a spell system to rival D&D are those two

BG2 might be a great spellcaster game, but if you don't like magic or wish low-key magic, you're going to have a bad time. I didn't enjoy the overpowered nature of magic users. (especially on higher levels)

Remember: Argue the point, not the person. Remain polite and constructive. Friendly forums have friendly debate. There's no shame in being wrong. If you don't have something to add, don't post for the sake of it. And don't be afraid to post thoughts you are uncertain about, that's what discussion is for.
---
Pet threads, everyone has them. I love imagining Gods, Monsters, Factions and Weapons.

Posted (edited)
  On 1/23/2013 at 10:00 PM, JFSOCC said:

 

  On 1/23/2013 at 1:46 PM, Malekith said:

BG2 and IE games in general had an amazingly large and varied spell list, BG2 is easily the best spellcaster game ever made, with the "mage duels" one of the most memorable and fun parts of the game. I think that a true spiritual successor game should give extra attention to the spell system with a variety of  diffirent effects, damage types and protections.

I don't believe that they will manage to rival BG2 in this area, but it would be good if they could do it. Josh worked on IWD2 and Tim made Arcanum. If anyone can make a spell system to rival D&D are those two

BG2 might be a great spellcaster game, but if you don't like magic or wish low-key magic, you're going to have a bad time. I didn't enjoy the overpowered nature of magic users. (especially on higher levels)

P:E will be a high-key magic setting, but the first game will finish at relativelly low levels, so it will be more like BG1.

Also you could beat the game without magic users in your party

Edited by Malekith
Posted

I actually love friendly-fire with big, giant, scary-powerful spells. But, all things in moderation.

 

It might be interesting if there were talents/spell-improvements you could pick that reduced/affected friendly fire from your AOE spells.  The key word being "might." It'd hafta be more interesting than "the more points you put into this upgrade, the less damage your allies take from your spell-splosions!"

 

Maybe just have a really good/convenient set of protection spells to choose from? So, one player might just not mind the micromanagement necessary to keep his allies out of harm's way when he strategically launches fireballs, and he'll spend 5 more points on improving his damage and offensive spells, and another player might say "Hey, I LOVE tossing fireballs and chain lightning, but I don't want my allies to die all the time," and get some "Bestows protection from fire within a 15-foot radius. 3 charges. Each instance of negated fire damage uses 1 charge" spell. *shrug*

 

Also, I think some kind of callout should be in order. Like how you can usually yell "GRENADE!" in a shooter and your allies can get away from the enemies. Targeting a fireball or lightning tempest should work with potential party AI to have them try to get out of the way when it's feasible (when they're not stunned, or surrounded, or knocked on their arse, etc.)

 

You're still going to have times when they get hit by stuff. I'm not against the option to turn off friendly fire (usually tied to easier difficulty modes), but if you have that on, it should still be pretty managable. In most games like that I've played, the player has almost no tools at their disposal for getting allies out of the blast zone whilst leaving enemies in. At the very least, you should have an option such as to cast fire resistance on a specific member of your party (to just reduce fire damage, not negate it, even), who then has the ability to keep multiple enemies in the blast radius of a spell whilst other allies get out. In other words, you hurt your own person, in a very planned way, to hurt many enemy persons substantially worse.

 

It should require effort, but the player shouldn't have to be a jedi just to pull it off. This kinda ties into the idea of useful/plentiful cross-character combos.

  • Like 1

Should we not start with some Ipelagos, or at least some Greater Ipelagos, before tackling a named Arch Ipelago? 6_u

Posted

Also reminds me of someone's NWN walkthrough suggestion of having a hell hound (100% immunity to fire) as your wizard's familiar, and sending it out as a combat decoy, then fireballing it and all surrounding enemies. Rinse and repeat.

  • Like 1

Me? I'm dishonest, and a dishonest man you can always trust to be dishonest. Honestly. It's the honest ones you want to watch out for.

 

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...