Saving the Wizard Class

[Captain Shrek]

This entire hard counter/ soft counter debate is *so* off the point that I am surprised any of these people enjoyed playing IE games or even ever liked to play PnPs.

 

Magic is not *only* about combat. Magic is all about flavor. Flavor of what? Of having extraordinary and enigmatic occurrences. It is not about fighting people, although that is one of its aspects. The fault of IE games was that they did not create utility for their utility spells, i.e. lack of implementation in the game where the spells could be used outside  of combat in a flavourful fashion all the while furthering the story and creating content. What needs to be done to fix it, is to reassert that content and make magic actually feel magical. Right now, it is just colored glowing arrows. When the only difference between magic and non-magic is fireball and a vial of alchemical fire, the game is nothing but a chore. 

Edited November 22, 2014 by Captain Shrek

[Yonjuro]

 

...

 

Total agreement here. Although you have to be fair in that if you play with the NPCs that TOB gives you, then you basically have to fall back to mages for most effects if you don't play any of the cool kits as your main character. You actually already said that part.

I'm fine with mages having a wide variety of spells at their disposal, but I think they should neither be all exclusive nor equally good/better than all the stuff other classes can get. There should still be some unique benefit to choosing each class.

 

 Sure, I agree. Each class should have a compelling reason to play it from a gameplay perspective (as well as a roleplay perspective). Regarding ToB npcs: If you recruited Keldorn and Mazzy as your back line and any 3 of Jaheira, Minsc, Valygar, Korgan, Anomen and Sarevok as your front line and made your PC any martial class you wanted (bonus if the class can use Carsomyr but not required), Draconis wouldn't stand a chance.

 

 

...

I also think that josh explained himself very well, so if anyone still wants to hold a grudge against him, I guess it can't be helped. A more productive way would probably be to be creative about it and compile a list of cool spell effects you'd like to see in the add-on and keep it ready after release.

 

 Yes, exactly. The point has been made. Everyone take a deep breath and if you have good ideas of spells you'd like to see in the expansion, post them. 

[Namutree]

 I would like to implement more of these in the future, but it wasn't realistic for core PoE because we were building all of the game systems from scratch.

 

This is exactly as I said.

[Lephys]

What needs to be done to fix it, is to reassert that content and make magic actually feel magical. Right now, it is just colored glowing arrows. When the only difference between magic and non-magic is fireball and a vial of alchemical fire, the game is nothing but a chore.

Such exaggeration. I don't see Warriors swinging their sword and remotely causing people within a circle to suffer several horrible effects, and possibly some elemental damage, in a non-glowy fashion.

 

I do understand what you mean about magic, but they're building this system specifically for a cRPG, not for a PnP adventure in which anything could happen. So, I don't really fault them for making magic more practical and less "I can summon another universe in which this world ISN'T threatened, then move us all into THAT universe to 'save the world'". There's nothing wrong with extremely mysterious/wondrous magic, but it's simply FAR more valuable in a strictly-narrative setting (book series' and the like) than in a video game setting in which the player is actively calling the shots at any given moment. Mainly because it takes a ludicrous amount of coding before you even start to approach that feeling of the dynamic usage of such magic.

 

I'm all FOR a cRPG that captures the splendor of a PnP session. But, if it can't do that, then those 73 ultra-fancy spells that matter a whole bunch in a vibrant virtual world full of super-significant decisions just become "that annoying hard counter," or "that over-powered spell." The progression system and combat mechanics, etc, begin to compete with the spectacularity (totally a word) of the magic/lore.

[Infinitron]

Where gaming really changed after it was the word you use frequently within this quote: "balance".

 

That word is the poison which has largely afflicted cRPGs since 2002 second only to the epithet: "streamlined".

 

This is an odd myth that I've seen many people repeat, and I don't understand where it came from. Most single player RPGs, both classic and modern, have been poorly balanced.

 

If you want to understand what has changed in RPGs since 2002, look at the money. Streamlining an RPG to make it more suitable for a mass audience means more money. Balancing an RPG, on the other hand - who cares? It's not a high priority for anyone. Genres where balance is actually a serious concern are strategy games and MMOs, where good balancing is often praised.

 

tl;dr "Evil balance" is a boogeyman. At worst, it's a marketing buzzword that AAA devs threw at you to justify simplifying and streamlining their mechanics. ("Oblivion will have less skills than Morrowind, but they'll be better balanced!" Yeah, no they weren't.)

[Bester]

I don't disagree that it would be cool to have more diverse options like polymorphs, spell doublers, sequencers, contingencies, time stop, etc. We designed a list of more diverse, complex, niche spells and most of them didn't wind up being implemented because of the enormous amount of time (and often specialized UI) that they demand.

[...]

Clearly not for everyone, but this was honestly what we were able to do -- not because we decided to short-change spellcasters, but because even with 5 out of 11 classes (the casters) receiving about 3/4 of all abilities, we could only do so many special case scripts for them.

 

 

So scripting is your main problem? You've been outsourcing things in the past, it'd cost you a 3-4k bucks to get a programmer from Europe to code things for a whole month, and with your solid framework he'd finish all those spells (and other interesting ones) in much less time than that.

Is it the particles? It takes 3 hours for a professional to make a good particle effect or you could reuse another one.

 

I just don't see the problem. You can see why it feels weird that you're not implementing all those things.

Edited November 22, 2014 by Bester

[Doppelschwert]

Well, I am not sure how the resource consumption minimizers are not extreme. This *is* a computer game. When you finish it, the leftover resources are not going to turn into real life currency of any kind. So yeah, playing too conservatively has a benefit only if there is a meta-knowledge involved concerning the future availability of resources. This statement should be beyond reproach.

 

Now, my statement above is even more applicable to *per rest* resources. They are not even being really lost! Every time you rest, *woof* there they are. Not using them is really of no benefit whatsoever. Once again, this is especially true of the per encounter resource. The *best* strategic/tactical (let's not get into semantics) choice here is to use them every encounter, by default. 

 

So I can't really agree with you here. There is no reason as I see it, to conserve spells in PoE.

 

It takes a certain amount of rationality to break ressource hoarding, although I don't want to imply that I think that people who hoard ressources in video games are irrational. I tried to find some scientific data on this subject but unfortunatly wasn't able to (in contrast to compulsive hoarding in real life).

I think its about trying to be better prepared for the next encounter, so if you are able to save some ressources now you will be able to turn the next fight around if it goes too badly. The main point here is probably that you can almost never know whats around the next corner, reinforcing the need to stay alert and prepared. You dont want to waste your precious ressources on trash if another adventuring party waits around the corner. At least I think its a psychological thing which is hard to break, I don't think people do this on purpose because they planned some greater benefit around it.

[Quetzalcoatl]

 

I don't disagree that it would be cool to have more diverse options like polymorphs, spell doublers, sequencers, contingencies, time stop, etc. We designed a list of more diverse, complex, niche spells and most of them didn't wind up being implemented because of the enormous amount of time (and often specialized UI) that they demand.

[...]

Clearly not for everyone, but this was honestly what we were able to do -- not because we decided to short-change spellcasters, but because even with 5 out of 11 classes (the casters) receiving about 3/4 of all abilities, we could only do so many special case scripts for them.

 

 

So scripting is your main problem? You've been outsourcing things in the past, it'd cost you a 3-4k bucks to get a programmer from Europe to code things for a whole month, and with your solid framework he'd finish all those spells (and other interesting ones) in much less time than that.

Is it the particles? It takes 3 hours for a professional to make a good particle effect or you could reuse another one.

 

I just don't see the problem. You can see why it feels weird that you're not implementing all those things.

I doubt it's this simple, otherwise we'd be drowning in quality RPG's to play.

[Shevek]

I guess the best case scenario for magic is they rebalance the spells a bit to give them more oomph and they allow some kinda minor per encounter spell use. If we are lucky, they may consider stuff like spell sequencers and time stop in an xpac a year or so post release.

 

Not sure if thats enough on release but, hey, it is what it is.

[Yonjuro]

 .... if you have good ideas of spells you'd like to see in the expansion, post them. 

 

 Good idea, Yonjuro. I'll start. (Yeah, I know I'm supposed to make a sock puppet account for this. I'm busy, alright?):

 

 Illusory Simulacra: Can be cast at any time. Produces one purely illusory copy of the caster per level of the caster. Each copy appears as an exact duplicate of the caster and can be ordered to move to any position and to attack any enemies. The images have no physical or magical attack and likewise they cannot be harmed by an attack. Casting time: TBD. Spell Duration: TBD. Level 1.

 

 ------

 

  This spell is essentially mirror image with some extra benefits. The images can be used defensively by the caster but also to lead enemies away pre-battle or instead of a battle if they all fall for it. Whether they fall for it depends on perception (countered by the caster's resolve) and enemies with low intellect and higher resolve might be more likely to persist in following or attacking an illusory image. Enemies attacking images or blocking the illusory attacks of images become more vulnerable to attacks from party members. Enemies that stop attacking and defending the attacks of images because they understand that they are illusions become vulnerable to an AoO by the caster who looks identical. 

 

I think this spell is both IE-like in that there are a lot of interesting ways to use it, some of them quite strategic. It is also PoE-like in that:

1. it isn't insta-kill with hard counters
2. the images can't be used by themselves to win an encounter but require using tactics that compliment the spell
3. it isn't a single tactic that will always work the same way for every enemy because it depends on the stats of the caster and the enemy

 

 If you've read this far, your mission, if you choose to accept it, is to come up with one or more spells that are simultaneously IE-like, that is, they will make the magic system more interesting and PoE-like in that they aren't, say, turning an enemy to stone with no save (or preventing an enemy from turning you stone with no save - they don't get to do that either so that would be a pointless spell).

[Sir Newbie]

Can someone resume for me (please) the main reasons why people here have a problem with the wizards in PoE ? (or do i have to read all the 15th pages...)

 

And yeah i know people say they suck but why ?

[Yonjuro]

Can someone resume for me (please) the main reasons why people here have a problem with the wizards in PoE ? (or do i have to read all the 15th pages...)

 

And yeah i know people say they suck but why ?

 

 Sorry no. All 15. There'll be a quiz.

 

 Oh, all right.

 

 Compared to IE Mages, PoE Wizards have fewer types of spells. They are mainly a ranged damage class with some crowd control spells and some buffs. If you don't compare them to IE mages, it's too strong of a statement to say that they suck. If you use the spells that they have they do, in fact, do a lot of damage and their CC spells can really help your party.

 

 However, we might want to compare them to IE Mages. The CC spells that they have are less potent. They don't have summoning spells (other classes have summons but not as strong or as flexible as IE mages/clerics). They don't have an invisibility spell etc. Overall, the spell system doesn't really combine in as many interesting ways as the IE system did.

 

 For example, in BG1, your mage might cast Horror or Confusion into a group of enemies. While they all run around like idiots, your mage casts Monster Summoning 1, and maybe you get a group of kobold archers who kill the enemy party with arrows while they run around like idiots. (The price you pay is that an enemy spell caster might do that to your party, but hey, those are the breaks.) 

 

 In PoE, the wizard just doesn't have a spell combination that's quite as potent as that so they feel a bit like a archer who occasionally tosses a grenade or a tear gas bomb. They're still useful, but don't feel like a class that can own the battlefield like a well-played IE mage. 

Edited November 22, 2014 by Yonjuro

[Quetzalcoatl]

The PoE Wizard has spells that confuse and terrify the enemy too. Although I'm not sure what 'terrified' does in this game. Is it anything like the fear/panic effect in the IE games?

 

While they all run around like idiots, your mage casts Monster Summoning 1, and maybe you get a group of kobold archers who kill the enemy party with arrows while they run around like idiots.

 

Why would you waste a spell slot for that? You could just finish off the panicked enemies with ranged weapons.

Edited November 23, 2014 by Quetzalcoatl

[Failion]

Can someone resume for me (please) the main reasons why people here have a problem with the wizards in PoE ? (or do i have to read all the 15th pages...)

 

And yeah i know people say they suck but why ?

people mad they cant solo the game casting mirror image and sunfiring everything to oblivion. 

[Namutree]

 

Can someone resume for me (please) the main reasons why people here have a problem with the wizards in PoE ? (or do i have to read all the 15th pages...)

 

And yeah i know people say they suck but why ?

people mad they cant solo the game casting mirror image and sunfiring everything to oblivion. 

 

You can't do that in the IE games either.

[Yonjuro]

The PoE Wizard has spells that confuse and terrify the enemy too. Although I'm not sure what 'terrified' does in this game. Is it anything like the fear/panic effect in the IE games?

 

 

 

 Some of CC spells will disable enemies for a short time. The effect is a little less dramatic than the IE games.

 

 

 

While they all run around like idiots, your mage casts Monster Summoning 1, and maybe you get a group of kobold archers who kill the enemy party with arrows while they run around like idiots.

 

Why would you waste a spell slot for that? You could just finish off the panicked enemies with ranged weapons.

 

Sure, that could work, but then again you might be roleplaying a mage that doesn't like to exert himself or you might be soloing and want to be sure to kill them all before the CC spell wears off and also have cannon fodder in case it does. 

Edited November 23, 2014 by Yonjuro

[Namutree]

 

The PoE Wizard has spells that confuse and terrify the enemy too. Although I'm not sure what 'terrified' does in this game. Is it anything like the fear/panic effect in the IE games?

 

 

 

 Some of CC spells will disable enemies for a short time. The effect is a little less dramatic than the IE games.

 

 

 

While they all run around like idiots, your mage casts Monster Summoning 1, and maybe you get a group of kobold archers who kill the enemy party with arrows while they run around like idiots.

 

Why would you waste a spell slot for that? You could just finish off the panicked enemies with ranged weapons.

 

Sure, that could work, but then again you might be roleplaying a mage that doesn't like to exert himself or you might be soloing and want to be sure kill them all before the CC spell wears off and also have cannon fodder in case it does. 

 

Also in Vanilla BG1 what ranged weapon can the mage even use?

[Yonjuro]

 

 

The PoE Wizard has spells that confuse and terrify the enemy too. Although I'm not sure what 'terrified' does in this game. Is it anything like the fear/panic effect in the IE games?

 

 

 

 Some of CC spells will disable enemies for a short time. The effect is a little less dramatic than the IE games.

 

 

 

While they all run around like idiots, your mage casts Monster Summoning 1, and maybe you get a group of kobold archers who kill the enemy party with arrows while they run around like idiots.

 

Why would you waste a spell slot for that? You could just finish off the panicked enemies with ranged weapons.

 

Sure, that could work, but then again you might be roleplaying a mage that doesn't like to exert himself or you might be soloing and want to be sure kill them all before the CC spell wears off and also have cannon fodder in case it does. 

 

Also in Vanilla BG1 what ranged weapon can the mage even use?

 

 

 Exactly. The choice is sling or throwing dagger for 1d4 damage (in the rare event that the mage actually hits something) and 1 attack per round. I assume the ranged weapon comment was for the case where you have a full party.

[Yonjuro]

 

...

people mad they cant solo the game casting mirror image and sunfiring everything to oblivion. 

 

 That may be true of some people. If you read my posts and some others, you will see that there are other reasons.

[Namutree]

 

 

...

people mad they cant solo the game casting mirror image and sunfiring everything to oblivion. 

 

 That may be true of some people. If you read my posts and some others, you will see that there are other reasons.

 

That isn't anyone since that can't be done. 

[Yonjuro]

 

 

 

...

people mad they cant solo the game casting mirror image and sunfiring everything to oblivion. 

 

 That may be true of some people. If you read my posts and some others, you will see that there are other reasons.

 

That isn't anyone since that can't be done. 

 

 

 Well no, it can't be done in the IE games, but, technically, it is possible that some people might still be mad that they can't do it in PoE either, I guess.  Of course, I haven't seen anyone in this thread that has said anything like that now that you bring it up. 

[Silent Winter]

 If you've read this far, your mission, if you choose to accept it, is to come up with one or more spells that are simultaneously IE-like, that is, they will make the magic system more interesting and PoE-like in that they aren't, say, turning an enemy to stone with no save (or preventing an enemy from turning you stone with no save - they don't get to do that either so that would be a pointless spell).

Nice idea for the illusory simulacra.

 

I'll have a go:

Uneven Ground - the ground is warped in an AOE (stones stick up out of the ground or something) - chance for enemy / ally to be tripped (effect like knockdown, leading to prone state) - save vs. DEX(?)

IE like: - like Grease, it's a double-edged sword as it affects allies too but thrown ahead at a charging horde, it can thin the ranks to give you less to deal with at once.

PoE like: It's not a win-button, it depends on the enemies' stats to be effective but chance of success will be such that it doesn't affect everyone in a group

[Yonjuro]

 

 If you've read this far, your mission, if you choose to accept it, is to come up with one or more spells that are simultaneously IE-like, that is, they will make the magic system more interesting and PoE-like in that they aren't, say, turning an enemy to stone with no save (or preventing an enemy from turning you stone with no save - they don't get to do that either so that would be a pointless spell).

Nice idea for the illusory simulacra.

 

I'll have a go:

Uneven Ground - the ground is warped in an AOE (stones stick up out of the ground or something) - chance for enemy / ally to be tripped (effect like knockdown, leading to prone state) - save vs. DEX(?)

IE like: - like Grease, it's a double-edged sword as it affects allies too but thrown ahead at a charging horde, it can thin the ranks to give you less to deal with at once.

PoE like: It's not a win-button, it depends on the enemies' stats to be effective but chance of success will be such that it doesn't affect everyone in a group

 

 

 This could be useful when you draw more enemies than you expected like the beetle encounter in the BB where you attack towards the south, near the log bridge and the group to the east goes hostile too.

[Stun]

Also in Vanilla BG1 what ranged weapon can the mage even use?

In BG1 a mage can use slings, throwing daggers and Darts.

 

Note: Darts can actually be pretty darn powerful for a mage, since the game gives you darts of wounding and darts of stunning. Stunning darts are particularly powerful because they're the only weapon in the game that can stun an opponent. And with darts a mage can have 2 attacks per round. The downside to darts, though, is that they lack the range of slings, so a mage who uses them has to put himself in danger to do so.

Edited November 23, 2014 by Stun

[Mr. Magniloquent]

@Mr. Magniloquent:

 

To be fair, they said they were making a game in the spirit of the IE games, Not making a game in the spirit of the D&D universe. I don't believe that designing a different magic system and a different combat system from the ground up inherently causes the game to fail to resemble the IE games.

 

That being said, I'm not saying the magic system is flawless, or that other people like it so it's better than what you like, which is somehow stupid. But, I fear you're harboring an irrationally inflated level of resentment toward Josh and Co., to be honest.

 

No. I do not accept your distinction. The power and versatility of the IE games were fundamental to their game play. They have still not been matched, rivaled, or duplicated in any cRPG since. I don't loathe Mr. Sawyer or Obsidian. I generally have high regard for them, which is why I funded. If my acute and valid criticisms appear harsh, then it is likely because they are accurate.

 

There are actually plenty of classic/iconic D&D spells that comply quite nicely with the no-hard-counters philosophy. For example, the Mirror Image spell, a mainstay of low level mage combat in Baldur's Gate, is an archetypal "soft counter" - very powerful, but still defeatable by a variety of means.

 

This is an excellent example of a spell you shall not see in PoE. With Mirror Image, any attack that strikes an image will have its damage and effects absolutely negated. That is undesirable by Mr. Sawyer's design philosophy. As such, the spell only grants +20 Deflection and decreases with each hit. I use the Stoneskin Ironskin to further illustrate this point. Rather than absolutely negating the physical damage of 1 attack per 2 caster levels as with the IE games, the user is granted +8 DT for 10 attacks. This is a monumental difference. If you're not sure why, I can explain the reasons if you so desire. This is what is meant by Mr. Sawyer disapproving of "hard-counters". It is far more insidious than simply omitting spells like Protection from Fire.

Edited November 23, 2014 by Mr. Magniloquent