Update #74: Wizard & Druid Reflections

[Mr. Magniloquent]

So what do you guys think about the details divulged within the update? Do you feel this take will represent the spirit of the classes which makes them so iconic? How do you feel about them putting twists on convention, is it new life to an old bag of tricks or sacrilege against what has already withstood time? How do you guys feel about the spells? Are you glad to see departures from D&D conventions, or do you find the differences to be undesirable?

 

I think I may actually like the take on with Wizard's grimoire. The description of its function reminded me of a scientific apparatus. The grimoire and the scribed spells within it function like a device. The Wizard merely creates and operates them in the same way an actual scientist would create an operate say....a high-pressure liquid chromatographer. This feels consistent and flavorful to me. I'm hoping Arcane Veil compensates for the declared absence of pre-combat spell buffing. I haven't made up my mind on the Blast ability yet. While only being able to damage "surrounding enemies" rather than a small AoE, it feels a bit contrived. It also appears to imply that any wand may be used in this manner--even if it has different abilities specific to it.

 

The Druid feels somewhat unremarkable to me just yet. I certainly approve of retaining spell casting in shapeshifted forms, though I am unsure about how only one form may be selected. This limits avenues of problem solving and variety for the Druid which is generally has a negative impact. I imagine the forced singular "bond" choice will have role-play implications?

 

What do you guys think?

[Lephys]

I really like the style of the spell designs. You've got your basic nukes and such, but most of the spells listed are not only interesting, but also provide you with multiple functions in the same spell, not all of which need to be utilized to the maximum in any given situation.

 

As for Blast... I think it'll be pretty versatile. I think the idea is to give Wizards the availability of a sort of go-to weapon, instead of leaving them dead-in-the-water like in D&D ("Oh, you're out of spells? You're just a feeble human with horrible weapon skill!"). Various wands can still have all kinds of differing attacks and damage types, and some can even alter the range of the Blast (it's just a potential thing. I'm not saying they will in some confirmed capacity or anything). I take it other people can use rods, wands, and scepters, too, but do not get to take advantage of the Blast effect. So, I dunno. It just doesn't rub me as particularly negative in any way right now.

 

The Druid only getting one form is a bit sad... BUT, it's really not much different from a magic school/discipline specialization/restriction in a lot of other games. It's very similar. I mean, zooming out and looking at just an RPG in general, yeah, I'd like to see a Druid take on different forms to tackle different scenarios, etc. BUT, if it's done well, I can't say I mind the restriction to a single one. It's kind of like a sub-class option. And, yeah, hopefully it has roleplay implications. I want to see a choice as permanent and integral to your character as that affect a decent bit of things throughout the game, in a way distinct from a choice of a different form (or a non-Druid).

[Jarrakul]

"Over the course of the game, druids can acquire additional spiritshift forms to give them more options." -from the update

 

So you can have multiple forms. You just only start with one. Seems reasonable to me.

 

As for wands, it sounds like they're basically just weapons, rather than charged spell-producing items as in D&D and the IE games. Which I'm totally fine with, personally, and mages getting bonuses with them sounds good.

 

I also like most of the spells. I notice a few old spells reappearing with new names (Ray of Fire will forever be Scorcher in my mind, I'm sure), which is cool. I hope the weapon spells are a lot better now, as they were usually quite lackluster in spite of their thematic awesomeness.

[Lephys]

"Over the course of the game, druids can acquire additional spiritshift forms to give them more options." -from the update

 

So you can have multiple forms. You just only start with one. Seems reasonable to me.

 

Yeah, I just got to watch the video (finally made it home from work). I kinda just took Mr. Magniloquent's word on it, since I'm usually the one who misses stuff (or is at least much slower to get to all the specific infos presented, a la my avatar). I missed that last bit of text in the update about Druids. I think I was so excited, my brain just sorta skimmed it, then dumped it before actually storing it. Maybe it was just too worried about the double "wands" typo. Silly brain... 8P

 

No worries. Mistakes happen. Good news is good news, 8D

Edited March 19, 2014 by Lephys

[anameforobsidian]

For anyone who didn't watch the video, it had extra information not in the update.  Grimoire Imprint for example sounds like a really cool spell.

[Cubiq]

There are 2 spells of the druid that i'm not really a fan of.

The Flame sword and and the Insect Swarm.

They are kind of a rip off from DnD.

Also i don't think the druid needs the flaming sword, as he will most likely use shapeshifting from for close combat and they can select a damage type at the start of the game.

I would prefer if they made it in to a stamina sap sword or something conditional or with a twist.

 

As for the insect swarm i hope it doesn't come with the damage soundtrack after casting it.

Uhh

Uhh

Uhh

Uhh

Uhh

Uhh

Uhh

Uhh

[JFSOCC]

I wonder what part of the spells wizards and druids have would have utility outside of combat. There is a treasure trove of potential there.

The example spells I've seen, some I like, but many are boring. I'd love to see some more out of the box thinking in spells. I liked the spell that let you switch places with characters. But what about revealing hidden doors? Activating ancient runes? or a telekinesis or levitation spell?

 

That wizards and druids can both cause conditions with their spells is interesting to mix with rogues, which may finally make wizards something I'd consider. So that's a plus.

I'd love to learn more about (all) the classes outside of combat though. I feel that Obsidian could take more risks with their classes.

And what about crafting your own tome with spells? or will players be limited to pre-made tomes and maybe one stolen spell?

It's hard to make a final judgement without knowing more spells or how the classes function outside of combat, but from what I see it's a fairly tame transliteration of wizards and druids from other IPs

Edited March 19, 2014 by JFSOCC

[Jarrakul]

As far as grimoires go, it sounds like you'll be able to add new spells to existing grimoires, provided they have room. The update mentioned something about paying a nominal research fee to add spells from an enemy's grimoire to yours after you beat them. Presumably there will also be stores that allow the same thing. So I wouldn't worry too much about only having premade ones, since it sounds like you'll be able to build your own fairly easily.

[Gfted1]

Both of the classes sound interesting and fun. Out of petty selfishness for my own gaming preferences I wish there was a way to make a "nuker" mage.

[PrimeJunta]

I like both. They're clearly more focused on tactical play than the "traditional" versions, but both hew closely to their respective archetypes. The grimoire is a great idea; a bit of a nod towards Vancian casting without the annoyance of having to micromanage spell lists.

 

@Gfted1, what do you mean by a "nuker" mage and why wouldn't you be able to make one? Several of the wizard spells are AoE/multi-target damage, which is at least what I'd expect from a "nuker." I've no doubt there will be ways to pump up those at the expense of other abilities.

[Gfted1]

@Gfted1, what do you mean by a "nuker" mage and why wouldn't you be able to make one? Several of the wizard spells are AoE/multi-target damage, which is at least what I'd expect from a "nuker." I've no doubt there will be ways to pump up those at the expense of other abilities.

My understanding of the classes is that they are designed with specific roles in mind (IE: Rogues and Rangers are the Heavy Hitters, Mage and Druid are for AoE.) Sure you can make them something else but they will never reach their full potential as a class if you do. I prefer my mages to be "glass cannons" that have high damages vs. both single and multi-targets but cant stand up to attack very well. This is most likely a case of me being stuck in the past. I think it may have been interesting to offer each class a offensive, or defensive, or hybrid build.

 

EDIT: Im also slightly concerned that since spells don't scale with level that if you miss finding whatever the next spell upgrade is that the mage will fall behind but hopefully the new spells aren't too hidden.

[Reever]

I also find it interesting how you can research new spell you've seen other Wizards use! And of course, the once-per-day/encounter limits disappear the higher your level is (for the weakest spells, but still!!).

 

The Druid also sounds good, of course. We'll have to do at least 11 playthroughs to experience all those characters first hand :D

[BrainMuncher]

There are 2 spells of the druid that i'm not really a fan of.

The Flame sword and and the Insect Swarm.

They are kind of a rip off from DnD.

Half of the game is inspired by/ripped from dnd. I think intentionally so. Half of the entire video game industry is ripped from dnd.

• Fan of Flames - burning hands
• Jolting Touch - shocking grasp
• Minoletta's Minor Missiles - I'll let you guess this one
• Thrust of Tattered Veils - lance of disruption
• Wizard's Double - mirror image
• Concelhaut's Corrosive Siphon - idk about this one
• Ray of Fire - scorcher
• Fireball - Classic, reliable, deadly. That's fireball. (Reflexes)
• Kalakoth's Minor Blights - minute meteors
• Minoletta's Bounding Missiles - missile storm
• Ryngrim's Repulsive Visage - cloak of fear
• Dimensional Shift - idk
• Essential Phantom - summon shadow
• Minor Arcane Reflection - spell turning
• Citzal's Spirit Lance - idk
• Malignant Cloud - cloudkill
• Arkemyr's Capricious Hex - cause disease/contagion
• Ninagauth's Freezing Pillar - ice storm

 

 

[Lephys]

 

@Gfted1, what do you mean by a "nuker" mage and why wouldn't you be able to make one? Several of the wizard spells are AoE/multi-target damage, which is at least what I'd expect from a "nuker." I've no doubt there will be ways to pump up those at the expense of other abilities.

My understanding of the classes is that they are designed with specific roles in mind (IE: Rogues and Rangers are the Heavy Hitters, Mage and Druid are for AoE.) Sure you can make them something else but they will never reach their full potential as a class if you do. I prefer my mages to be "glass cannons" that have high damages vs. both single and multi-targets but cant stand up to attack very well. This is most likely a case of me being stuck in the past. I think it may have been interesting to offer each class a offensive, or defensive, or hybrid build.

 

I could very well be wrong, but, I think you'll easily be able to make a nuker mage. (Also, for what it's worth, there's nothing wrong with your desire to have that style of "glass cannon" mage. It's a perfectly valid desire, and does not mean you're stuck in the past. I prefer that general aspect of magery, as well.)

 

Continuing with the possibility of being wrong, I gather that the whole roles thing deals more with a comparison of class potentials than with just straight-up class functions. In other words, if you make a mage, your given mage isn't just automatically 75% more AoE than any other character who isn't a mage. I think he just gets to have, if he so chooses, significantly greater AoE capabilities (access to more AoE spells/abilities and greater AoE damage, etc.) than any other class would. So, if you made, say, a Ranger, and just made him the absolute most AoE Ranger you could, THEN you made a Wizard (mage) and did the same thing, the Ranger's sheer AoE capabilities would pale in comparison to the Wizard's.

 

Out of all the aspects of class ability (general fields in which all classes can be effective), the Wizard gets the most AoE potential. I don't think it means they don't get any other-stuff potential (like nukes, for example). They just get a bit less nuke potential than AoE potential. So, kind of the reverse of the Ranger-Wizard example above, if you made a character of each class, and tried to make both of them the highest single-target damagers you could (you'd have your nuke wizard, and a "nuker" Ranger -- I know that doesn't quite apply, but... you get the idea), the Ranger would out-single-target-damage you. But, your Wizard could still out-single-target-damage lots of other Rangers who weren't built specifically to maximize their single-target damage capabilities.

 

EDIT: Im also slightly concerned that since spells don't scale with level that if you miss finding whatever the next spell upgrade is that the mage will fall behind but hopefully the new spells aren't too hidden.

I'm actually a bit concerned, as well. It's more the principle of the thing, for me. If you get a little starter spell called PewPew, and it does 5 damage. Then, you play 20 hours into the game, and most of the enemies have 5+ armor, and/or are simply threatening enough that doing 5 damage at a time is nowhere near an efficient enough use of your time to win the fight before they kill you, then it doesn't really do you any good that that PewPew spell has worked its way down from per-rest, to per-encounter, to at-will, and that you can cast it infinite times. By the time you've cast it 20 times, those late-game foes have wiped the floor with your whole party, and your Wizard's successfully deducted 10% of their health.

 

For that reason, I'd like to at least see minor scaling on the spells. It always irks me in games when you're just forced to abandon old spells. "You don't need firebolt anymore. You have fireBALL! 8D!" Yeah, but they're not the same spell. Why can't I make a more-powerful-but-still-less-powerful-than-other-spells fireBOLT? I don't know.

 

And a Fighter doesn't have this problem, does he? I mean, you're gonna get +something to your weapon's effectiveness as you progress, right? Even if it comes from your equipment stats. Otherwise, there's no point in swinging a weapon at all later in the game. Thus, if you use Power Strike or something, that's still you swinging a sword, PLUS the additional affects of power strike. *Shrug*

[Lephys]

 

There are 2 spells of the druid that i'm not really a fan of.

The Flame sword and and the Insect Swarm.

They are kind of a rip off from DnD.

Half of the game is inspired by/ripped from dnd. I think intentionally so. Half of the entire video game industry is ripped from dnd.

 

To be fair, I don't think D&D invented the simple concepts of magic. If I think putting crackers in soup will probably be tasty, it doesn't mean I'm ripping off everyone else who's ever put crackers in soup.

 

If you take a time machine back to when D&D was created, and kidnap the creators so it never existed back when it did, someone else would still think "Hmm... what if there were wizards, and they could like... spray fire out of their hands to strike multiple foes?"

 

I mean, if concepts that simple are ripping off D&D, then D&D is just ripping off the inventor of the flame thrower, or physics. *shrug*

 

I don't really consider something to be "ripping off" something else (in a malicious/negative connotation) unless they're presenting someone else's exact same idea as if it's not only their own, but as if they thought of it first.

 

To me, it's like Obsidian is saying "Thanks, D&D, for providing us with a lot of experience and ideas upon which to build a foundation to build a spell system. Cone-area spells of various elements are a pretty useful/solid idea."

[rjshae]

As for wands, it sounds like they're basically just weapons, rather than charged spell-producing items as in D&D and the IE games. Which I'm totally fine with, personally, and mages getting bonuses with them sounds good.

 

We don't know that they can't be charged, spell-producing items, in addition to being magic foci.

[BrainMuncher]

@lephys, yeah I only used the term "ripped off" because that's what I was replying to. My point was that the fact that some things are similar to things from dnd isn't a reason to not like them. If you avoided games that had thing inspired by dnd you'd have to pretty much avoid playing games altogether.

[anameforobsidian]

 

@Gfted1, what do you mean by a "nuker" mage and why wouldn't you be able to make one? Several of the wizard spells are AoE/multi-target damage, which is at least what I'd expect from a "nuker." I've no doubt there will be ways to pump up those at the expense of other abilities.

My understanding of the classes is that they are designed with specific roles in mind (IE: Rogues and Rangers are the Heavy Hitters, Mage and Druid are for AoE.) Sure you can make them something else but they will never reach their full potential as a class if you do. I prefer my mages to be "glass cannons" that have high damages vs. both single and multi-targets but cant stand up to attack very well. This is most likely a case of me being stuck in the past. I think it may have been interesting to offer each class a offensive, or defensive, or hybrid build.

 

EDIT: Im also slightly concerned that since spells don't scale with level that if you miss finding whatever the next spell upgrade is that the mage will fall behind but hopefully the new spells aren't too hidden.

 

That's still pretty easy to do.  Pump up might to the exclusion of other stats, only wear cloth armor for maximum casting speed, and focus on single target damage and disables.  It won't be the 2nd edition experience, because mages were stupidly powerful in 2E, by design.  However, considering the extreme power of bows in BG1, it doesn't sound like the experience will really be all that different.

[Cubiq]

 

 

There are 2 spells of the druid that i'm not really a fan of.

The Flame sword and and the Insect Swarm.

They are kind of a rip off from DnD.

Half of the game is inspired by/ripped from dnd. I think intentionally so. Half of the entire video game industry is ripped from dnd.

 

To be fair, I don't think D&D invented the simple concepts of magic. If I think putting crackers in soup will probably be tasty, it doesn't mean I'm ripping off everyone else who's ever put crackers in soup.

 

If you take a time machine back to when D&D was created, and kidnap the creators so it never existed back when it did, someone else would still think "Hmm... what if there were wizards, and they could like... spray fire out of their hands to strike multiple foes?"

 

I mean, if concepts that simple are ripping off D&D, then D&D is just ripping off the inventor of the flame thrower, or physics. *shrug*

 

I don't really consider something to be "ripping off" something else (in a malicious/negative connotation) unless they're presenting someone else's exact same idea as if it's not only their own, but as if they thought of it first.

 

To me, it's like Obsidian is saying "Thanks, D&D, for providing us with a lot of experience and ideas upon which to build a foundation to build a spell system. Cone-area spells of various elements are a pretty useful/solid idea."

Here are the facts:

-They have directly copied spell functionality several times from DnD.                          

-They have put these same spells on the exact same classes from DnD.                     

-They have copied the class casting system from DnD

-They have put all of this in to an intellectual property owned by Obsidian.

No amount of sugar coating will ever change that.

 

It's obvious they are taking a lot their ideas from the DnD and IE games and they have shown that in many other parts of the game.

But the spells don't NEED to be copied. I didn't mention most of the spells because they already getting away with a LOT.

Some of the spells are iconic like Fireball and some of them are Easter eggs like Magic missile and they actually made a painfully bearable small effort to change some of them like the Cloak of Fear with an electrical damage bonus for the druid.

But don't copy things just for the sake of copying to make it feel like an IE game.

That flaming sword could have been ANYTHING but a flaming sword. Why not flaming hands? Why not a "random element upon cast" sword? Why not a stamina sapping sword?

Why does a druid even need a flaming sword in the first place? They have Shapeshifting for close combat, that comes with other bonuses, like stamina regeneration or aoe damage.  And they can even do elemental damage with their attacks, if they chose one at the start of the game.

There's no logic to their copying, and there are barely any original ideas there.

[Ineth]

The Druid only getting one form is a bit sad...

 

Better one useful form, than multiple weak¹ and virtually identical ones (remember "Black Bear" and "Brown Bear"?)

 

¹at least at higher levels...

[Ineth]

Here are the facts:

-They have directly copied spell functionality several times from DnD.                          

-They have put these same spells on the exact same classes from DnD.                    

 

Interestingly, they seem to have "borrowed" spell ideas specifically from 2nd edition D&D as implemented in BG1 / BG2 / IWD1.

 

At least I don't see anything resembling some of the more unique IWD2 and PST spells in there...

PoE is supposed to be a spiritual successor to those games too, isn't it?

 

Also, a few more spells based on creative never-done-before ideas would be nice.

 

I'd especially love some spells that interact with the physical surroundings to allow environment-aware tactics, as those are all too rare and there's still lots of potential for innovation there. And don't tell me that kind of stuff is too difficult to implement; the creators of BG managed to make the projectiles from the "Lightning Bolt" spell bounce off walls and damage everything in their path back in 1998 with the primitive Infinity Engine. In 2014 with the Unity Engine, it should be easy.

[Fatback]

 

 

Here are the facts:

-They have directly copied spell functionality several times from DnD.

-They have put these same spells on the exact same classes from DnD.

Interestingly, they seem to have "borrowed" spell ideas specifically from 2nd edition D&D as implemented in BG1 / BG2 / IWD1.

 

At least I don't see anything resembling some of the more unique IWD2 and PST spells in there...

PoE is supposed to be a spiritual successor to those games too, isn't it?

 

Also, a few more spells based on creative never-done-before ideas would be nice.

 

I'd especially love some spells that interact with the physical surroundings to allow environment-aware tactics, as those are all too rare and there's still lots of potential for innovation there. And don't tell me that kind of stuff is too difficult to implement; the creators of BG managed to make the projectiles from the "Lightning Bolt" spell bounce off walls and damage everything in their path back in 1998 with the primitive Infinity Engine. In 2014 with the Unity Engine, it should be easy.

 

There's a spell that throws boulders and when hits solid objects explodes sounds exactly like what your looking for

[rjshae]

Hopefully there won't be many spells that can directly replicate skills, such as spider climb in D&D. Those tend to devalue the other classes.

[Lephys]

Here are the facts:

-They have directly copied spell functionality several times from DnD.                          

-They have put these same spells on the exact same classes from DnD.                     

-They have copied the class casting system from DnD

-They have put all of this in to an intellectual property owned by Obsidian.

No amount of sugar coating will ever change that.

Yes, as much as Burger King has copied McDonald's by also selling grilled beef patties that go between buns. DnD didn't invent the concept of Wizards shooting fire, etc. Those "copied" spells are very basic concepts. Along the lines of what BrainMuncher said, if you made sure nothing in PoE duplicated anything from D&D, then we pretty much wouldn't have anything that's in the game right now. Bows? D&D did it. Longswords? We have to invent a new type of sword, because D&D had those. Druids? Can't have that... D&D had nature-based spell casters called druids. Inns? Stolen from D&D.

 

Did Call of Duty copy Wolfenstein 3D by having pistols in it? Or are they both games that happen to involve shooting pistols?

 

There's a difference between using something that someone else used, and copying or somehow nefariously taking from someone else.

 

D&D doesn't hold the copyright on the very idea of Wizards who shoot fireballs, or electrocute people via touch, or categories of medieval weaponry. It's not sugar-coating. It's just fact.

 

 

The Druid only getting one form is a bit sad...

 

Better one useful form, than multiple weak¹ and virtually identical ones (remember "Black Bear" and "Brown Bear"?)

 

¹at least at higher levels...

 

True, but, in case you missed it, that was mistaken information: You only choose one form at character creation, but you can acquire "others" (dunno if it's all of them, or just 2 more, or what) as you progress your Druid through the game.

Edited March 20, 2014 by Lephys

[Nonek]

I wonder if Druids can lose themselves in their Wildforms?