Wizards with swords: Should wizards have melee capability?

[moridin84]

 

Being able to throw swords at people from a distance isn't going to make anyone feel like a melee/warrior wizard. 

 

Just out of curiosity... how often does a Jedi force throw his/her Lightsaber?

 

It's quite rare I think? It happens once or twice in the movies and while it's in most game where you play a Jedi it's normally useless.

Edited April 2, 2013 by moridin84

[Osvir]

 

 

Being able to throw swords at people from a distance isn't going to make anyone feel like a melee/warrior wizard. 

 

Just out of curiosity... how often does a Jedi force throw his/her Lightsaber?

 

It's quite rare I think? It happens once or twice in the movies and while it's in most game where you play a Jedi it's normally useless.

 

Exactly, that's the point I am trying to make. A Jedi can be seen as a Wizard who fights close-combat most of the time, with the ability to throw their sabers at a distance. They are still close-combat oriented first and foremost.

 

What I am flirting with is: Could the Grimoire function as a primitive fantasy/magical medieval (close-combat) Lightsaber for a "type of" Wizard?

 

Additional, stand-alone thought: A Yoda... err.. an Orlan melee Wizard would be awesome to roll with ;D

[Lephys]

 

 

I don't see how you expect to reside within your enemy, much less summon anything once there.

 

Teleporting blades into enemies from a distance, for example.  Teleportation could be a cool branch of magic.

 

 

Yeah, sorry. I was just having a bit of humorous fun with the literal meaning of "summon blades in my enemies."

 

What are you summoning? Blades. Where are you summoning? In your enemies.

 

I do like the idea of teleportation. I like the kind of spatial-joining thing most (like portals in, well... Portal). I think it would be awesome for some enemies to be behind cover, and for your Mage (or another magicky class) to open a 1-yard triangular "portal" in the air in front of an archer character, which connects to an identical portal-type opening in the air behind the enemies, allowing the archer to fire through.

 

Someone already mentioned that, if not something very similar. I mean, the archer could still miss or hit, but he can now bypass the enemies' cover to make attacks on them, rather than having to relocate before attacking.

 

I rather enjoy the utility of abilities like that.

 

The only problem I foresee with actually teleporting/summoning blades that burst into existence already inside your enemies is that it begs the question, "Why not just teleport/summon a small pebble into the middle of their brain, every single time?"

 

I think that's best handled with the whole "You can't teleport/summon things at a point where matter already resides" notion. Either that, or maybe just make teleportation of that nature extremely taxing (very few casts/ability uses per-encounter/day). It could easily be over-powered, for lack of a better term.

[Osvir]

^Spinning further on that Lephys, and going into off-topic domain: For some reason I think that idea with the pebble can have a touch of depth. It has a pretty major "Dark Arts" or "Forbidden Arts" tone to it. Something that must overcome the other recipents Soul in order to be able to physically summon stuff inside them, in turn perhaps even violating some sort of (example) "Law of Souls".

Take a novice Soul against a master Soul for instance (A low level Wizard vs a high level Fighter). The pebble would be unsuccessful.
Now turn it around, a high level Wizard (a Master) against a low level Fighter (a Novice). Why not? Granted that the P:E world allows for such a thing to happen.

Similarly, a Cipher manipulating Souls to such an extent that it could rip someone's soul out of their bodies entirely. Arthas kind of does this to Sylvanas in WarCraft III: Reign of Chaos.

About Portal stuff opening up behind the enemy archer, for balance sake... shouldn't the portal stay up for a little bit? This way the enemy archer can say "Hey! I can shoot right back at ya through this thing!". It could make stuff less overpowered. Eventually, the Wizard could perhaps even be able to teleport full characters, with a risk to cause permanent injury (In essence: "Loss of Limb". Strictly statistical).

TL;DR; Off-topic stuff: Speaking about high-level Soul magic stuff, teleportation and, I guess, presenting a solution to what could work as a "Summoning stuff inside someone" (Forbidden Arts).

[Lephys]

As always, you provide a menagerie of good ideas and analysis, Osvir, ^_^

 

You're right that the sort of "soul check" could work for summoning deadly objects within people's insides, but, it still seems a bit overpowered for some reason.

 

I mean, imagine if a gun didn't need to be aimed, but instead just instantly killed whomever you decided to target when you pulled the trigger. And the limitation was that you could only use it on someone who didn't have a gun, or who had a much smaller gun than yourself. Well, everyone who could manage it would have giant guns, and everyone who couldn't manage it would be at the people-with-guns' mercy. Sure, in reality, if you go 1-on-1 against someone with a gun, and you're unarmed, they most likely will win that fight. BUT, you can wear bullet-proof armor to protect your vitals, at least, and you can cause them to miss, depending on the distance and your movements, etc.

 

But, if they could just summon the bullets inside of you, it becomes binary. You might as well just make a death spell. At least then you could limit it more intelligently/easily. It's just harder to wrap your mind around "Sometimes you can instantly kill someone by simply summing a pebble 6 inches from where you could previously summon it, but other times you can't summon it there" than it is to wrap your mind around "if you're powerful enough, you can cause a person's death with a single spell, but it weakens you for a time, and/or can only be used very infrequently." Just for example.

 

But, back to stabbity mages, I really like the idea of what amounts to melee magic, even going as far as closely mimicking aspects of regular martial weapons. I think that's a much better route to take than "Your Wizard can just become a badass with a longsword in the same way that a seasoned soldier can." He can become a badass maybe, and he can use a longsword (ethereal or physical), but he can still do it in a different way that says "Mage" a lot more than it says "Fighter."

 

It's the same concept as seen in the way that Wizards/Mages tend to have missless or quite-tough-to-dodge spell projectiles, as opposed to archers/Rangers who have to rely on accuracy. They're both utilizing ranged attacks, but they remain distinct in style from one another. An arrow to the throat as opposed to the toe is what makes the archer/Ranger's attack skill effective, whereas the sphere of pure electricity the size of a human torso moving as fast as a crossbow bolt is what makes the Wizard/Mage's attacks effective. The same thing can be seen in the Grimoire Slam. The release of magical energy from the tome is what generates the effectiveness of the "slam," as opposed to a Fighter or Monk's physical form and Strength of their attack generating the effectiveness of some melee knockback move. Both moves are melee attacks, but the Mage's still stems from magical means.

[Iucounu]

As always, you provide a menagerie of good ideas and analysis, Osvir, ^_^

 

You're right that the sort of "soul check" could work for summoning deadly objects within people's insides, but, it still seems a bit overpowered for some reason.

 

I mean, imagine if a gun didn't need to be aimed, but instead just instantly killed whomever you decided to target when you pulled the trigger. And the limitation was that you could only use it on someone who didn't have a gun, or who had a much smaller gun than yourself. Well, everyone who could manage it would have giant guns, and everyone who couldn't manage it would be at the people-with-guns' mercy. Sure, in reality, if you go 1-on-1 against someone with a gun, and you're unarmed, they most likely will win that fight. BUT, you can wear bullet-proof armor to protect your vitals, at least, and you can cause them to miss, depending on the distance and your movements, etc.

Isn't it just the same with Deathspells? For example THE Deathspell in old D&D, killed you for certain if you were below a certain level. But that didn't mean that you had no way to defend yourself. You could buff yourself with deathward, disrupt the caster, go invisible ect. 

[Lephys]

Isn't it just the same with Deathspells? For example THE Deathspell in old D&D, killed you for certain if you were below a certain level. But that didn't mean that you had no way to defend yourself. You could buff yourself with deathward, disrupt the caster, go invisible ect.

It is, which was sort of my point. Being able to summon a pebble is something that isn't inherently fatal. However, a death spell is something that IS inherently fatal. It kills. So, it unnecessarily complicates things when your lore and mechanics allow for an extremely simple summoning spell to SOMETIMES instantly kill things. I mean, when you can summon pebbles inside brains to kill under certain circumstances, what's to stop ANYTHING from being elevated to fatal?

 

Conjure Drink. Conjure some drink inside their trachea (which, if their mouth is open, technically isn't even inside of their body. It's just empty space), and now they drown. OR, better yet, if you can summon/teleport things into their body, why not just teleport their own lung OUT of their body, and into someone else's body? That guy loses a lung suddenly, and dies, and the other guy gets HIS lung clogged with a teleported lung, causing HIS death.

 

Breathe Underwater. If you can create oxygen in a bubble around your mouth for the purposes of breathing underwater, then you can cast "Breathe Underwater" on an enemy's artery, bursting it instantly. Boom. They die.

 

It just doesn't make much sense, in the grand scheme of things. It complicates. It's very tricky to make sense of all the details when you start allowing such a drastic difference in such things.

 

A death spell's sole purpose is to cease life in the living target. Whereas, a summon pebble spell is an extremely simple spell that has absolutely nothing to do with death or even harm, directly, but then SUDDENLY is also allowed to create instant death.

[moridin84]

 

 

 

Being able to throw swords at people from a distance isn't going to make anyone feel like a melee/warrior wizard. 

 

Just out of curiosity... how often does a Jedi force throw his/her Lightsaber?

 

It's quite rare I think? It happens once or twice in the movies and while it's in most game where you play a Jedi it's normally useless.

 

Exactly, that's the point I am trying to make. A Jedi can be seen as a Wizard who fights close-combat most of the time, with the ability to throw their sabers at a distance. They are still close-combat oriented first and foremost.

 

What I am flirting with is: Could the Grimoire function as a primitive fantasy/magical medieval (close-combat) Lightsaber for a "type of" Wizard?

 

Additional, stand-alone thought: A Yoda... err.. an Orlan melee Wizard would be awesome to roll with ;D

 

A Jedi is closer to a Paladin than a Wizard. 

[Osvir]

@Lephys: There is one way to deal with it, and that is to make up some specific "lore" for the specific deathspell. So "Conjure Water" (although drowning someone from the inside sounds cool, it doesn't quite have the same tone as summoning, pretty much, a bullet into someone's brain).

Concept:
- Summon Death Pebble
A wicked and cruel ability, most foul and dispised by any high standard Wizard order. The Wizard solidifies the essence of the Soul within a target, inside their pinal gland to be more specific. About the size of a pebble. The result is swift death. It is most forbidden, only one has been known to use it in practice (the creator of this wicked abomination). By gathering, manipulating and compressing several forces of several souls, the Wizard does not only commit an atrocity to one entity, but a multitude of souls.

@Moridin84: In my opinion, viewing their force powers, I view them as Wizards. As an organization and as an ideology, yes Paladin would fit well. Strictly/Objectively speaking about their ability to bend the Force, then I view them as Wizards. Force-Push, Force-Choke, Force-Lightning, all those abilities are quite magical.

[Iucounu]

So, it unnecessarily complicates things when your lore and mechanics allow for an extremely simple summoning spell to SOMETIMES instantly kill things. I mean, when you can summon pebbles inside brains to kill under certain circumstances, what's to stop ANYTHING from being elevated to fatal?

It doesn't need to be a simple spell. On the contrary, casting spells that instantly affect a target without moving projectiles could be among the highest forms of magic. Take Naruto for example, only few ninja can control space-time jutsus there.

And if you still think it's overpowered, you can always make it dependant on additional conditions. For instance, the fourth Hokage could only teleport himself to an opponent if he had previously marked him. 

I admit it's a challenge to integrate such spells into a game and make them logically coherent and not overpowered. But when it works.. 

Edited April 3, 2013 by Iucounu

[moridin84]

@Moridin84: In my opinion, viewing their force powers, I view them as Wizards. As an organization and as an ideology, yes Paladin would fit well. Strictly/Objectively speaking about their ability to bend the Force, then I view them as Wizards. Force-Push, Force-Choke, Force-Lightning, all those abilities are quite magical.

 

I'm thinking mechanically. Most damage a Jedi does comes from melee, the force abilities they use are normally ancillary.

[Lephys]

It doesn't need to be a simple spell. On the contrary, casting spells that instantly affect a target without moving projectiles could be among the highest forms of magic. Take Naruto for example, only few ninja can control space-time jutsus there.

And if you still think it's overpowered, you can always make it dependant on additional conditions. For instance, the fourth Hokage could only teleport himself to an opponent if he had previously marked him. 

I admit it's a challenge to integrate such spells into a game and make them logically coherent and not overpowered. But when it works..

Yeah... it's definitely not impossible. It just kinda opens up a can of worms, is all, heh.

 

I still don't know how to quite put my finger on exactly what it feels like the problem is, either. Take Death spells. I don't even like instant death spells. I don't mind a "this will kill you, and your Willpower/Mental Fortitude check determines how long it will take" spell, but a "you either have defense against this or you die" just seems to override SO many of the factors that make up the meat and potatoes of the game. Do you have 1,000 hit points, or do you have 10? It doesn't matter. This spell kills you. It's not even about dealing enough damage, or hitting you in the right situation. It's just about hitting you.

 

So, I dunno... by the time you've produced enough restrictions on something like brain-pebble teleportation, it just seems like a ridiculous amount of work for very little payoff (as opposed to a "this spell simply affects your life essence and ceases/shatters it" spell). And, I mean, if you can summon something inside someone's brain or other vital organs, why even make it a pebble or a bullet or shuriken or any type of weapon, for that matter? Why not teleport a teddy bear, or a flower, or some water?

 

Anywho... like I said, I'm not quite sure what it is, exactly, that makes it seem so muddled. Maybe it's just the extreme shift? "With this spell that's not even designed for offense, literally every single piece of matter around you gains the ability to become unstoppably, instantly lethal." Then, there's the whole "if it's THAT hard and restrictive to actually manage to achieve such a kill, would anyone really take the time to choose that method over the 170 easier ways to use magic to kill someone?"

 

Maybe that's another part of what I'm thinking of, but can't seem to touch? It seems like the ability would be pretty much obsolete, in terms of gameplay mechanics, by the time you've properly written it into the lore and balanced it in the mechanics. *shrug*

[Ffordesoon]

There's actually a much simpler way of "balancing" an overpowered instakill spell like the one Lephys described, and it doesn't require nerfing the spell at all. All you would need to do is make the narrative and/or gameplay consequences of using the spell and others like it really crippling.

 

That could be as simple as sacrificing a point or two in one of your stats, and as complex as a really powerful mage leaving your party because you used forbidden magicks more times than he or she could bear. Maybe your soul could also have a piece broken off of it, or maybe everyone who witnesses the act is traumatized by it and you lose some rep with them. These are just some rough ideas, of course. The point is, you can use the spell, but there's a steep price to be paid for its use.

[Lephys]

^ This is very true, Ffordesoon. The old "There's a reason that psychotic, withered necromancer is the only guy in town who uses that magic" bit.

 

That is one method of balancing I'm very much in favor of. "You can create a nuclear explosion, but then you're burnt out on magical channeling for a year, so it better be worth it."

 

I dunno about a nuke... not in combat mechanics, anyway. But, you get the idea, I'm sure. *Thumbs up*

 

I just don't like simply the lone "Don't worry, 'cause the check will be very high" idea. As I mentioned, it kinda leads to "Is it even worth it to try to use that spell?" situations.

 

Ability-use consequences = AWESOME!

[Ffordesoon]

^ This is very true, Ffordesoon. The old "There's a reason that psychotic, withered necromancer is the only guy in town who uses that magic" bit.

 

That is one method of balancing I'm very much in favor of. "You can create a nuclear explosion, but then you're burnt out on magical channeling for a year, so it better be worth it."

 

I dunno about a nuke... not in combat mechanics, anyway. But, you get the idea, I'm sure. *Thumbs up*

 

I just don't like simply the lone "Don't worry, 'cause the check will be very high" idea. As I mentioned, it kinda leads to "Is it even worth it to try to use that spell?" situations.

 

Ability-use consequences = AWESOME!

We aims to please. :D

[Osvir]

There is also the question of counter-magic. Is there some way the Player and AI can counter Death Spells?

Because then it isn't a question if it hits or not, it is a question if the Player or AI defended themselves properly. Power struggles.

1. AI casts "Beam of Death"
2. Player casts "Portal", places 1 in front of the Player and 1 behind the AI
3. AI casts "Absorb", absorbs the energy of the beam, amps it up, shoots it back with greater force
4. Player casts "Shield", the beam burns through the shield like nothing and disintegrates the Player.

A bit of a "Who dies?"-ping pong "mini-game" (in a sense). This is probably hard to design but it would be awesome on so many levels. Leave it in the Player's hand to defend themselves against Death Spells. In this way it does not become "It might hit and kill you instantly, or it might not hit at all", it becomes "If it hits you you are dead, but if you block/dodge it you survive". It still has the power level of over 9'000, but you can do something about it.

[Iucounu]

So, I dunno... by the time you've produced enough restrictions on something like brain-pebble teleportation, it just seems like a ridiculous amount of work for very little payoff (as opposed to a "this spell simply affects your life essence and ceases/shatters it" spell). And, I mean, if you can summon something inside someone's brain or other vital organs, why even make it a pebble or a bullet or shuriken or any type of weapon, for that matter? Why not teleport a teddy bear, or a flower, or some water?

Well, yeah. After thinking about it a bit more, I don't particularly like the idea anymore. Better stick to the "teleport without error" version, or even better, portals. 

However I still think spells that instantly affect a target could be interesting (bypassing dodge and block defense). Maybe some sort of voodoo-curse magic, or sympathy as described in Patrick Rothfuss Kingkiller Chronicles. Even though I'm aware that's kind of difficult to build in a computer game. 

 

I still don't know how to quite put my finger on exactly what it feels like the problem is, either. Take Death spells. I don't even like instant death spells. I don't mind a "this will kill you, and your Willpower/Mental Fortitude check determines how long it will take" spell, but a "you either have defense against this or you die" just seems to override SO many of the factors that make up the meat and potatoes of the game. Do you have 1,000 hit points, or do you have 10? It doesn't matter. This spell kills you. It's not even about dealing enough damage, or hitting you in the right situation. It's just about hitting you.

I actually enjoy deathspells. It was always fun to lower the saving-throws of a dragon in BG systematically and than kill with a chromatic orb, rather than simply chopping it down. Two different means to an end. And in DA it was always my favorite combo to freeze and than shatter foes, which also bypasses hitpoints, and was a lifesaver especially on the hardest difficulty.

 

The main problem I see with deathspells and all save-or-else spells is when you try to offset their fatal effects only by probability. Good example would be this. Not a very tactical approach.

Edited April 4, 2013 by Iucounu

[Lephys]

However I still think spells that instantly affect a target could be interesting (bypassing dodge and block defense). Maybe some sort of voodoo-curse magic, or sympathy as described in Patrick Rothfuss Kingkiller Chronicles. Even though I'm aware that's kind of difficult to build in a computer game.

Spells that instantly affect, yes. Spells that instantly affect to the same (incredibly high) extent no matter what? I'm just... against that, for some reason. I mean, say at level 3 you have Firebolt (generic example is generic, heh), that hits one target and deals 10 damage. Then, at level 20, you have ULTRA INFERNO-SPHERE that hits all things in a 30-foot radius for 200 damage, igniting them for 20 burn damage-per-second, AND causes them to be capable of lighting other enemies around them on fire. As crazy-powerful as that is, it can still be mitigated by fire resistance, or by not clumping together, or maybe even by some other spell that extinguishes fire, that an enemy Mage can cast in order to prevent most of the burn-over-time damage.

 

Then, you have that spell, and beside it, you have "Summon Pebble, Coincidentally Inside Brain." Is their Mental Fortitude (or whatever the defensive attribute is) less than 40? No? Then the spell fails. Yes? Then they're dead. But what if they had good armor? Pebble to the brain still kills them. What if they had high pebble resistance? Doesn't matter. Pebbly death has embraced them.

 

Does that not... produce some kind of schism? *scratches head*. I still can't put my finger on exactly the factor that makes this problematic. I mean, I'm not against spells that instantly reduce the target's armor, then sometimes allowing a one-hit-kill from a strong attack that normally wouldn't have dealt so much damage through the armor. And I'm not against instant effects like that at all. But "death" is a pretty potent "effect." *shrug*

 

I dunno... I guess it feels like you're replacing all the strategy and tactics of combat (at least potentially, through the option to use this particular spell) with a single, simple "defense" check. You know... doesn't matter where you're standing, or when you attack, or how many hitpoints that enemy has, or how much damage your attack does, or what... the enemy is now a simple lock. Your success over the enemy is down to a single factor.

 

I think that, as long as you can introduce some more factors, and somehow make it still a strategic choice, it's fine. But, then, you've gotta distinguish the difficulty in successfully pulling off the death spell from successfully battling the thing with all non-death-spell means and killing it. To oversimplify this for the sake of an illustrative example: if the creature would take 30 seconds to kill without the death spell, and you make the death spell have a 30-second cast time, then you've merely created a far-less-exciting replacement for combat. So, the challenge in pulling off the death spell needs to be uniquely separate from the challenge of using "regular" means to kill the enemy.

 

We've already touched on some good examples of ways of doing this, but I don't know what the best combination of specific factors would be. Maybe death spells are never ranged. Maybe they have a 5-second cast time. Maybe they have a delay, which can be shorter or longer depending on the defensive saving throw. Maybe the caster becomes fatigued for 10 seconds after casting it, and is incapable of moving. Etc.

 

It's gotta be more complex than "If Fortitude < 40, casting the spell = that thing's death, so there's no reason NOT to cast it. If Fortitude > 40, casting the spell = a useless waste of time, so there's no reason TO cast it." That's all I know. Otherwise, you end up with a very boring ability that throws a wrench into the gears of the tactical nature of combat.

 

A good example would be a Cipher ability that needed to be channeled, and would, eventually, cause the death of the enemy, no matter what its HP/defenses/etc. So, would it be worth it to use it on a goblin with 30HP? Probably not. Would it be worth it to use it on a troll with 500HP? Possibly. It takes time (during which the troll might be more easily/quickly handled via different means, depending on other combat factors), AND your Cipher is left defenseless and incapable of offering any kind of support to anyone else while channeling the ability. If you can manage to use the rest of your party to support your Cipher during that channeling duration, then it's an effective choice to utilize the ability. If you can't, then it ends up being a better choice to seek some other means. The point is that there's a choice to be had there, and it's not a super easy one. It's dependent upon situational factors.

[TrashMan]

So, I dunno... by the time you've produced enough restrictions on something like brain-pebble teleportation, it just seems like a ridiculous amount of work for very little payoff (as opposed to a "this spell simply affects your life essence and ceases/shatters it" spell). And, I mean, if you can summon something inside someone's brain or other vital organs, why even make it a pebble or a bullet or shuriken or any type of weapon, for that matter? Why not teleport a teddy bear, or a flower, or some water?

 

Anywho... like I said, I'm not quite sure what it is, exactly, that makes it seem so muddled. Maybe it's just the extreme shift? "With this spell that's not even designed for offense, literally every single piece of matter around you gains the ability to become unstoppably, instantly lethal." Then, there's the whole "if it's THAT hard and restrictive to actually manage to achieve such a kill, would anyone really take the time to choose that method over the 170 easier ways to use magic to kill someone?"

 

Maybe that's another part of what I'm thinking of, but can't seem to touch? It seems like the ability would be pretty much obsolete, in terms of gameplay mechanics, by the time you've properly written it into the lore and balanced it in the mechanics. *shrug*

 

Ahh..the classic "unintended consequences" scenario.

 

Basicly you introduce X into the setting because it's cool and you like application Y of it....but you didn't think it trough and failed to notice a rather obvious applciation Z  and Q that people would use...and that makes a mockery of the setting

 

Like for example, introducting replicators into your setting because it's cool for your hereos to generate bullets on demand.... yet kinda forget that replicators would make economy totally poinltess.

 

It causes a rise of "why didn't they use X or do Y if they could do A or had acess to B"?

Basicly creates a completely illogical setting with people runing around with idiot balls.

[Iucounu]

Spells that instantly affect, yes. Spells that instantly affect to the same (incredibly high) extent no matter what? 

The idea with the voodoo example was rather, that if you mangae to create a link to an opponent, the fight is more or less already over. The challenging part is to establish the link, and well, even then it could still require sacrifice. A good example would be Hidan from the Naruto Manga (again). In this case, Hidan himself was the voodoo doll, and he created a link by hitting his enemies with his special weapon to gain their blood. He than would stab himself to hurt his opponent through the link. In the end he alwasy got the better of his enemies, as he happened to be immortal..

That would be btw, not even offtopic, as it's one example of how a melee mage of the darker arts could operate. Instead of concentrating on one enemy at a time, he tries to attack as many enemies as possible to gain their blood and linking them with him. Enemis can't kill him, as they'd risk to kill themselves, while he can either attack them further or stabbing himself, harming all enemies he's connected with simultaneously. 

 

As for the pebble in the bvrain.. as I already said, I don't really like the idea anymore (more because of style reasons, teddybear in the brain did it for me), but one idea was that powerful opponents can build some kind of barrier around them, that protects them from teleport just like in Star Trek you can't beam someone from his ship if the shields are up. Now here we have the problem again that combat would be reduced to a single dice roll. But I have no doubt you could build in more complex conditions and requirements that add some tactics to it.

Alternatively it could be so that you can only defend yourself against the spell by magical means. The consequence would be of course, that as a fighter you can't hold yourself against mages of the highest power levels without abilities or special magical items. Perhaps no something everybody likes. But I think this could be interesting too, especially when you do the spacial reflecting shields, portal thing. 

 

We've already touched on some good examples of ways of doing this, but I don't know what the best combination of specific factors would be. Maybe death spells are never ranged. Maybe they have a 5-second cast time. Maybe they have a delay, which can be shorter or longer depending on the defensive saving throw. Maybe the caster becomes fatigued for 10 seconds after casting it, and is incapable of moving. Etc.

I'm all for that (the general idea). This is actually what I meant when I said deathspells (and perhaps powerful magic in general) should have other drawbacks, not just that they depend on chance. 

 

It's gotta be more complex than "If Fortitude < 40, casting the spell = that thing's death, so there's no reason NOT to cast it. If Fortitude > 40, casting the spell = a useless waste of time, so there's no reason TO cast it." That's all I know. Otherwise, you end up with a very boring ability that throws a wrench into the gears of the tactical nature of combat.

Actually, for lesser foes, I don't mind such mechanics. Apart from that, you're right. 

Edited April 5, 2013 by Iucounu

[Lephys]

The idea with the voodoo example was rather, that if you mangae to create a link to an opponent, the fight is more or less already over. The challenging part is to establish the link, and well, even then it could still require sacrifice. A good example would be Hidan from the Naruto Manga (again). In this case, Hidan himself was the voodoo doll, and he created a link by hitting his enemies with his special weapon to gain their blood. He than would stab himself to hurt his opponent through the link.

For what it's worth, I kinda love Naruto (and the way many animes like it tend to get QUITE creative with powers/abilities), ^_^. And, with this very good example, I just want to emphasize the fact that, in the context of Naruto, the whole "hit them with my special weapon" part is actually probably quite tricky. I mean, between illusions and speedy techniques and raw weapon skill and all manner of deception, the folk of the Naruto universe generally aren't easy to hit, even when they kinda suck. They tend to be quite crafty. Alas, most of that in a cRPG is reduced to more simple rolls.

 

I know you already touched on that, and you're not arguing against it. And yes, just the simple idea of "you've got to manage to hit me, in melee range, in order to establish a link to utilize your ludicrously powerful effects", itself, balances things a ton. Even if a bit more is needed (depending on the difficulty and complexity of the character's capability to melee strike the target), it's an excellent start.

 

I'm all for that (the general idea). This is actually what I meant when I said deathspells (and perhaps powerful magic in general) should have other drawbacks, not just that they depend on chance.

Yeah, sorry. I tend to analyze things and elaborate to the point of seeming to suggest direct disagreement on at least some things. I was only trying to roll with what your contributed thoughts on the particulars of drawbacks and such sparked in my mind.

 

Actually, for lesser foes, I don't mind such mechanics. Apart from that, you're right.

Agreed. I didn't even think of that, but when a significant power difference is conveyed, I really don't have a problem with it at all. Edited April 5, 2013 by Lephys

[Iucounu]

Yeah, I guess since in PE misses will be a rare occurrence, it's not that easy. Overall, to balance such things out and make them fit into a setting both stylishly and metaphysically is rather hard. I guess that's why you get spell descriptions like "squishing the life essence" and such. 

 

Anyway, if Obsidian would somehow implement such a build, I'd take it for my first playthrough. That means, if they not also implement some sort of Pain Blicker, that would be even more awesome! And it would probably end up with Kishimoto bringing Obsidian to court..

[Wighnut]

For me the plate-wearing mage goes a little bit to far. However, a Gandalf-style wizard (sword/staff, basic melee capabilities) would be awesome.

[chabba990]

I really think it depands on the "power of magic". For instance, Gandalf is in a world where magic is incredibly scarce. He himself is a member of a demigod-like race, and that's how he can perform magical deeds, which is still very small and weak compared to d&d spells and magics. But the point is, that a wizard must spend a LOT of time learning forgotten languages, experiencing with magical substances, revealing obscure secrets, etc.... All of these things takes a lot of time, whilst a fellow warrior spends all day in the gym, and he trains himself in combat. That is why they shouldn't be close to the combat capabilities of a true warrior. And it wouldn't be fair anyway.

On the other hand, on possible solution could be to implement specific magical weapons to wizards. So for example, a magical staff, that causes magical damage + special effect on hit, and it can only be used in the hands of the wizard. I also believe that this is the most fitting weapon for them anyway, so why not augment it with additional combat powers?

[Randomthom]

I always loved the Bladesinger archetype and I'll probably try to play something along those lines in PE. Lightly armoured, Longsword in main-hand, nothing in off-hand, spellcaster, agile & graceful. My favourite PnP character was a 3.5ed Bladesinger who retired from adventuring at level 27. Nothing quite like a character with 5 attacks per round who can also cast level 10 spells!