Please Change the Might Attribute

[Cantousent]

I get what Sawyer says in the video, but I would observe two things about the idea of dex or wis:  dexterity, as a broad category, reflects the idea of both the ability to dodge and the ability to work well with your hands.  Wisdom is intuitively tied to priests and elders as well as the willpower to live by that wisdom.  Sure, you could divide them out more, but it's simply not as jarring to have them lumped together.

 

Might imparted by souls yielding stronger power to spells strikes me as an after the fact argument to support the decision to monkey around with the attribute system.  My biggest problem is getting my head around the idea of Might imparting physical prowess as a result of a strong soul and someone who has a great physique from working out all the time.

 

As an aside, as much as I hate the idea that Might ended up being the way it did won't stop me from enjoying the game, but I'll always think it seems a bit contrived, at the very least by the choice of the term Might.  However, I resent like hell that we didn't get to see the damned cat.  I was listening to the video and actually scrolled up to see the cat.  Rat bastard!

[Mayama]

My problem is that if attributes only marginaly alter a class than we need more skills than now and also skills that alter how the class plays.

[Zansatsu]

My issue with it is this, take the Cipher for example. His spells hit hard as ****, pump him full of might and his weapon attacks hit hard as ****, put him in Medium armor, give him a big 2 hander, and you basically have a walking spell casting warrior of F*** you and everything else..... I just think there should be a separation of Spell power and Weapon attack power. It seems pretty Lopsided in favor of Spell casters. I don't know maybe I don't grasp it yet.

[Seari]

Eh, that video doesn't really answer my question. He talks about extremes(dexterous character that isn't good at dodging), but I'm talking about an archetype, a physically weak wizard that has incredible power. But that character can't exist in this attribute system. Wait... the dexterous character that's bad at dodging can't either... I understand that attributes are tricky to design, and you can't appease everyone, but this is just eh... questionable.

 

But whatever, I don't mind anymore. I'm over it. I'm just gonna go about it(roleplay) like this is DBZ, I'm not being sarcastic.

 

I'm more worried about combat, and if they make it acceptable, then I won't care about the rest. As story+dialogue will most likely be good.

 

I was expecting a BG2-clone with improvements where they were needed, but I'll just keep an open mind about this. Not like I have a choice.

 

EDIT: PHYSICALLY WEAK WIZARD

Edited September 5, 2014 by Seari

[Matt516]

A "fragile" wizard who has incredible power can totally exist. That's why HP is tied to CON.

 

And for the last time everybody... this is a completely different fantasy world from Forgotten Realms (and all derivatives). This world operates on completely different rules. Might does not mean physical strength. Great physical strength is indeed one result of high Might - but they are not one and the same.

[Seari]

A "fragile" wizard who has incredible power can totally exist. That's why HP is tied to CON.

 

And for the last time everybody... this is a completely different fantasy world from Forgotten Realms (and all derivatives). This world operates on completely different rules. Might does not mean physical strength. Great physical strength is indeed one result of high Might - but they are not one and the same.

How does one measure physical strength then? I'm just curious.

[Zansatsu]

A "fragile" wizard who has incredible power can totally exist. That's why HP is tied to CON.

 

And for the last time everybody... this is a completely different fantasy world from Forgotten Realms (and all derivatives). This world operates on completely different rules. Might does not mean physical strength. Great physical strength is indeed one result of high Might - but they are not one and the same.

How does it not mean physical strength when it is what dictates all damage type strengths? I understand ya you won't have a lot of HP if you don't pick Con that's not what I'm talking about if this was sort of aimed at me. I'm not trying to argue I'm trying to come to a revelation. 

[Seari]

 

A "fragile" wizard who has incredible power can totally exist. That's why HP is tied to CON.

 

And for the last time everybody... this is a completely different fantasy world from Forgotten Realms (and all derivatives). This world operates on completely different rules. Might does not mean physical strength. Great physical strength is indeed one result of high Might - but they are not one and the same.

How does it not mean physical strength when it is what dictates all damage type strengths? I understand ya you won't have a lot of HP if you don't pick Con that's not what I'm talking about if this was sort of aimed at me. I'm not trying to argue I'm trying to come to a revelation. 

 

You must open your mind, and abandon the grognard ways.

 

Sorry, I can't help myself

[Mayama]

If you really want weak but powerfull wizards you could easily do it with the skill system. Give the option to choose negative skills at character creation like "weakling" you do X% less damage with bows and melee weapons. Choosing them should give you a extra positive skill or something similar.

[Iucounu]

 

A "fragile" wizard who has incredible power can totally exist. That's why HP is tied to CON.

 

And for the last time everybody... this is a completely different fantasy world from Forgotten Realms (and all derivatives). This world operates on completely different rules. Might does not mean physical strength. Great physical strength is indeed one result of high Might - but they are not one and the same.

How does it not mean physical strength when it is what dictates all damage type strengths? I understand ya you won't have a lot of HP if you don't pick Con that's not what I'm talking about if this was sort of aimed at me. I'm not trying to argue I'm trying to come to a revelation. 

 

If they were one and the same, than that would mean that, say giants, would generally have a more powerful soul than humans, because they're more heavy hitters. That would be rather weird.

[Seari]

You racist, why can't giants have bigger souls. Check your privilege.

[morhilane]

My issue with it is this, take the Cipher for example. His spells hit hard as ****, pump him full of might and his weapon attacks hit hard as ****, put him in Medium armor, give him a big 2 hander, and you basically have a walking spell casting warrior of F*** you and everything else..... I just think there should be a separation of Spell power and Weapon attack power. It seems pretty Lopsided in favor of Spell casters. I don't know maybe I don't grasp it yet.

 

You are missing recovery time and that the classes aren't fully balanced yet.

 

Casting a spell in light armor has a 4.2 seconds recovery time before you can do something else, in heavy armor that is 6.0 seconds. Medium armor is probably around 5 seconds of recovery time. Two-handed weapon recovery time is between 1.4 seconds (light) and 2.0 seconds (heavy), so medium would be around 1.6 seconds.

 

Your "battlemage" will cast a spell, than he will have to wait 5 seconds before he can swing his sword or cast another spell. In those 5 seconds, the pure melee character (no spell used) will have hit his enemy with his two-handed weapon around 3 times.

[Captain Shrek]

My feeling is that MIght simply measures a GAMEPLAY mechanic called damage and not a real physical attribute. Sawyer wanted to streamline the system by taking away indirect physical attribute->gamplay attribute conversion like in DnD. So he invented "might". I assume that its oroginal role in DnD is now probably only played in dialogues. I wonder... :D

 

In PnP if the chars encounter a heavy boulder the fighter makes a STR check to see if he can move it. Do chars make Might check in PoE? Or is this degenerate like lockpicks vs breaking doors  ?

Edited September 5, 2014 by Captain Shrek

[Seari]

My feeling is that MIght simply measures a GAMEPLAY mechanic called damage and not a real physical attribute. Sawyer wanted to streamline the system by taking away indirect physical attribute->gamplay attribute conversion like in DnD. So he invented "might". I assume that its oroginal role in DnD is now probably only played in dialogues. I wonder... :D

 

In PnP if the chars encounter a heavy boulder the fighter makes a STR check to see if he can move it. Do chars make Might check in PoE? Or is this degenerate like lockpicks vs breaking doors  ?

Silly grognard, stop living in the past.

Edited September 5, 2014 by Seari

[Zansatsu]

 

My issue with it is this, take the Cipher for example. His spells hit hard as ****, pump him full of might and his weapon attacks hit hard as ****, put him in Medium armor, give him a big 2 hander, and you basically have a walking spell casting warrior of F*** you and everything else..... I just think there should be a separation of Spell power and Weapon attack power. It seems pretty Lopsided in favor of Spell casters. I don't know maybe I don't grasp it yet.

 

You are missing recovery time and that the classes aren't fully balanced yet.

 

Casting a spell in light armor has a 4.2 seconds recovery time before you can do something else, in heavy armor that is 6.0 seconds. Medium armor is probably around 5 seconds of recovery time. Two-handed weapon recovery time is between 1.4 seconds (light) and 2.0 seconds (heavy), so medium would be around 1.6 seconds.

 

Your "battlemage" will cast a spell, than he will have to wait 5 seconds before he can swing his sword or cast another spell. In those 5 seconds, the pure melee character (no spell used) will have hit his enemy with his two-handed weapon around 3 times.

 

Sweet thanks I got it now.

[Infinitron]

Eh, that video doesn't really answer my question. He talks about extremes(dexterous character that isn't good at dodging), but I'm talking about an archetype, a physically weak wizard that has incredible power. But that character can't exist in this attribute system. Wait... the dexterous character that's bad at dodging can't either... I understand that attributes are tricky to design, and you can't appease everyone, but this is just eh... questionable.

 

 

This is true. However, there are two mitigating factors:

 

1) Wizards do decent damage anyway, even without a high Might score. The spells are just inherently tough.

 

2) D&D didn't actually have any stat that increased spell damage, so you could say its attributes didn't exactly support that archetype either. Between Might as the stat that increases spell damage and no stat at all, it's probably better to have an option.

Edited September 6, 2014 by Infinitron

[Matt516]

 

A "fragile" wizard who has incredible power can totally exist. That's why HP is tied to CON.

 

And for the last time everybody... this is a completely different fantasy world from Forgotten Realms (and all derivatives). This world operates on completely different rules. Might does not mean physical strength. Great physical strength is indeed one result of high Might - but they are not one and the same.

How does one measure physical strength then? I'm just curious.

 

 

Not with an attribute - not in this game.

[Azrael Ultima]

I'm kinda wondering why people would need an attribute to tell them if their own character is strong.

How does it not mean physical strength when it is what dictates all damage type strengths? I understand ya you won't have a lot of HP if you don't pick Con that's not what I'm talking about if this was sort of aimed at me. I'm not trying to argue I'm trying to come to a revelation.

Because there are other ways to make your attacks hurt more. Might can represent physical strength, but it also represents everything else that makes you hit harder. A character's Might stat is the combined result of all of them, not any one of them individually. Edited September 6, 2014 by Azrael Ultima

[Seari]

Eh, that video doesn't really answer my question. He talks about extremes(dexterous character that isn't good at dodging), but I'm talking about an archetype, a physically weak wizard that has incredible power. But that character can't exist in this attribute system. Wait... the dexterous character that's bad at dodging can't either... I understand that attributes are tricky to design, and you can't appease everyone, but this is just eh... questionable.

 

 

This is true. However, there are two mitigating factors:

 

1) Wizards do decent damage anyway, even without a high Might score. The spells are just inherently tough.

 

2) D&D didn't actually have any stat that increased spell damage, so you could say its attributes didn't exactly support that archetype either. Between Might as the stat that increases spell damage and no stat at all, it's probably better to have an option.

 

True, but there were other factors from attributes which are missing here, which are spell slots and attribute requirements to cast spells. Which brings me to my next problem with this system.

 

In dnd a lot of lower level spells were still useful at higher levels, because they scaled per level. In PoE they only scale from your might attribute as far as I know. And this is the reason why there are so many duplicate spells, that pretty much do the same thing, except a bit better. Won't the lower level spells be useless at higher levels in this system or am I missing something here?

 

Maybe they'll fix it in the expansion, once the level difference is evident.

 

side note: Wizards might as well be renamed to Sorcerers, since they don't require any training whatsoever to cast spells.

Edited September 6, 2014 by Seari

[Shevek]

Might Attribute is just all wrong a Wizard is just as Strong as a fighter and then on top of that a can wield more power full spells.

 

Dont try to re invent the attribute system and stream line it its not what the old BG or RPGs were about. I am suprised you just didnt create 2 atributes power and reflex and leave it at that.

 

Bring back Strength for how strong some one is and will power and inteligence for magic user classes.

There is nothing wrong with might except maybe the name. I bet if they renamed it power or potency then less people whould whine about muscle wizards.

[wpmaura]

 

Might Attribute is just all wrong a Wizard is just as Strong as a fighter and then on top of that a can wield more power full spells.

 

Dont try to re invent the attribute system and stream line it its not what the old BG or RPGs were about. I am suprised you just didnt create 2 atributes power and reflex and leave it at that.

 

Bring back Strength for how strong some one is and will power and inteligence for magic user classes.

There is nothing wrong with might except maybe the name. I bet if they renamed it power or potency then less people whould whine about muscle wizards.

 

 

No I wouldn't because strength is would still be missing, you can not have a bow that requires a strength to pull it back or a proper ecumbrance system, and kills role play. This game is supposed to be a spiritral successor to the BG series but the might attribute is more akin to a tribute to world of Warcraft. There could never be a way to allow bashing in of doors or chests.

 

Its flawed. It allows the most powerful or mighty wizard to hit someone with a two handed sword as it does a fighter. That's wrong.

[mutonizer]

 

Not with an attribute - not in this game.

I'm glad to know that "big bad tough" enemies will potentially have stupidly low Might because their Soul sucks. Finally an Ogre King dealing less damage than my pet rabbit!

[Tartantyco]

They're not going to change it, because separating physical and magical damage only creates dump stats. Instead of complaining about how you're so confused by a very simple abstraction, maybe you should ask yourselves why they did it this way.

[wpmaura]

They're not going to change it, because separating physical and magical damage only creates dump stats. Instead of complaining about how you're so confused by a very simple abstraction, maybe you should ask yourselves why they did it this way.

they did it to make it simple and easy. its not a dump stat its a standard attribute for anyone who is serious in rpgs. I am not confused by it I am annoyed they are dumbing it down and making it simple. All the other ones make sense except this one, all they have to do is remove the damage increase for magic and its over.

[Shevek]

 

 

Might Attribute is just all wrong a Wizard is just as Strong as a fighter and then on top of that a can wield more power full spells.

 

Dont try to re invent the attribute system and stream line it its not what the old BG or RPGs were about. I am suprised you just didnt create 2 atributes power and reflex and leave it at that.

 

Bring back Strength for how strong some one is and will power and inteligence for magic user classes.

There is nothing wrong with might except maybe the name. I bet if they renamed it power or potency then less people whould whine about muscle wizards.

 

 

No I wouldn't because strength is would still be missing, you can not have a bow that requires a strength to pull it back or a proper ecumbrance system, and kills role play. This game is supposed to be a spiritral successor to the BG series but the might attribute is more akin to a tribute to world of Warcraft. There could never be a way to allow bashing in of doors or chests.

 

Its flawed. It allows the most powerful or mighty wizard to hit someone with a two handed sword as it does a fighter. That's wrong.

 

Two things:

 

1. BG didnt have a very good encumbrance system either. In fact, its inventory system was a mess that was only remedied by potion bags, bags of holding, ammo bags, and gem bags (which all effectively negated the need for inventory slots or a strength score).

 

2. You are looking at it all wrong. Who is to say that magical power CAN'T make you swing a sword better? Hell, worked pretty good for this guy...