Saving the Wizard Class

[Hiro Protagonist II]

Admittedly, a wizard in PoE can't do the same stuff as a wizard in any of the IE games.

 

you can have any combination of wizard / cipher / chanter in PoE to more or less get the same number of spells per category per spell level, because summons, crowd control, afflictions and damage spells are all covered with these three classes.

 

The only thing that is missing this way are invisibility and teleport spells, I'll give you that.

 

ROFL.

 

So it takes three different classes in PoE to get up to a similar level as one class in an IE game but even you admit that it's still not quite there yet with an IE Wizard because it's still missing spells like invisibility and teleport.

 

This is hilarious. You guys are still trying to defend PoE with your weak arguments.

[Mr. Magniloquent]

Quetzalcoatl made some excellent points and I'll reiterate.

 

Admittedly, a wizard in PoE can't do the same stuff as a wizard in any of the IE games. However, that doesn't really matter anymore for actual combat tactics as soon as you consider a party with more than one wizard, which you probably had in the IE games anyway.

Instead of two wizards in an IE games you can have any combination of wizard / cipher / chanter in PoE to more or less get the same number of spells per category per spell level, because summons, crowd control, afflictions and damage spells are all covered with these three classes.

 

The only thing that is missing this way are invisibility and teleport spells, I'll give you that. On the other hand, I'm almost sure that stuff like contingency may make a return in the addon or PoE2, so there isn't really missing as much from the game as people pretend it is.

 

Regarding prebuffing: Hate me all you like, I'm glad it's gone. I also doubt it gives you the magic feels to look at the screens for some time seeing some icons stack on your characters, which is repetetive for the most part and not really engaging.

 

You can hate balance all you like as well, but I think it's a fair compromise when I'm able to pick up characters I actually like and like to play instead of having at least one wizard, one cleric and one tank in every party because the game rapes me otherwise.

 

They way overcomplicated this game out of fear and loathing for the wizard. Particulary with regards to the Wizard, Chanter, and Cipher, they could have all shared the very same spell list. Their resource mechanic would have been PLENTY to distinguish these classes. Wizards would be limited by per rest usage, Ciphers would incur their soul point cost, and Chanters would get them for free, but would have to wait around to cast like. That's a massive distinction in play-styles. Considering that Druids and Priests don't even derive their magic from gods in PoE, all the casters could have shared the same massive spell list! Instead, they chose to make unnecessary work for themselves and prioritize eviscerating a "core" class. The joke is on them though. Come release date, people will gravitate towards the wizard, and they will hate it and the game in turn.

 

The absence of prebuffing wouldn't be a problem for me if spell durations lasted more than 2 or three weapon swings and actually provided significant protection. They don't though. So it's just yet another failure to add to the lengthy list.

 

PoE is not a remake of Baldur's Gate 2. Claiming that something wasn't in BG1, so it therefore shan't be missed in PoE is a red-herring. This game is patterned after ALL of the IE games. IWD 1 & 2. BG 1 & 2, TotSC & ToB. Planescape Torment. Pitching the game on that note, then discarding such an essential component was a falsehood.

 

Try playing this game without a fighter. Let me know how that works out for you. Try having that fighter without a DPS class of some sort to back it. You couldn't be more wrong about being able to build whatever party you want. Each class is shelled into a specific MMO role where none are sufficient to act without a class from another role. One of the QA testers recently did that with a party of only Chanters, and Mr. Sawyer promptly tweeted about how he needed to nerf chanters now.

[Yonjuro]

 

 There are effectively no summons,

The druid and chanter have about a dozen summoning spells between them, and I believe the wizard has at least one summon spell. Any character can use figurines to summon stuff.

 

 

 I think you misunderstood this point.  By 'effectively no summons' the magniloquent one meant that the summons happen in combat only - that limitation removes some of the most interesting tactics from the game.   

 

 

you cannot stealth while in combat,

That's because the stealth in this game functions as actual stealth, dependent on factors like enemy proximity and how long you're in the enemy's line of sight. It's not the 'turn invisible (even right in front of an enemy)' mode from the IE games which wasn't a good implementation of stealth at all. Sadly, there doesn't seem to be any invisibility spells, you're right about that.

 

 This is a tangential point, but stealth in the IE games didn't work that way. Thieves, rangers and monks had to break line of sight to re-stealth. The various invisibility spells (and items) were the only ways to turn invisible in front of an enemy. As you point out, that option is gone in PoE (except for the rogue skill that turns a rogue invisible in combat).

 

 

We're left with contrived, nerfed, and boring facsimiles of what was good about spell casting in the IE games and expected to like it.

This strikes me as a touch dramatic.

 

 It is a touch dramatic but it isn't false.

 

Admittedly, a wizard in PoE can't do the same stuff as a wizard in any of the IE games.

 

 Excellent. Admitting that you have a problem is the first step towards solving it. 

 

 However, that doesn't really matter anymore for actual combat tactics as soon as you consider a party with more than one wizard, which you probably had in the IE games anyway.

Instead of two wizards in an IE games you can have any combination of wizard / cipher / chanter in PoE to more or less get the same number of spells per category per spell level, because summons, crowd control, afflictions and damage spells are all covered with these three classes.

 

 Fine. You have any party of six that you like. Can you demonstrate some interesting ways to stack spells (or other abilities)? I'll give you an example to start with. In PoE, if you have two wizards in your party, one of them can cast wall of flame and one can cast malignant cloud. Depending on positioning etc. the enemies might need to cross the flame wall to escape the malignant cloud. So, that's a little more exciting than slinging minor missiles from the back row but not quite as interesting as the examples I mentioned earlier. Maybe I'm missing something good. Do you have better examples?

 

The only thing that is missing this way are invisibility and teleport spells, I'll give you that. On the other hand, I'm almost sure that stuff like contingency may make a return in the addon or PoE2, so there isn't really missing as much from the game as people pretend it is.

 

 I think you're missing something important. When you lose invisibility spells, you aren't losing one thing, you're losing all of the interactions with the other spells. There's the saying that fighters are linear and mages are quadratic. That's almost literally true - the interesting thing is the interaction of the spells. The spells in PoE don't seem to have as many interesting uses and interesting interactions.

 

 I could be wrong. If so, show me how the spells combine.

[Stun]

Instead of two wizards in an IE games you can have any combination of wizard / cipher / chanter in PoE to more or less get the same number of spells per category per spell level, because summons, crowd control, afflictions and damage spells are all covered with these three classes.

Aah, you're trying to cite total party ability coverage in PoE to.... what a wizard can do by himself in a game like BG2...?

 

Interestingly enough, that STILL doesn't even things up. For a couple of pretty gigantic reasons.

 

1) You can Multi-class your mage in BG2. Your mage can literally be a cleric as well. This opens up a 3rd dimension as, your summoner, Nuker, debuffer, crowd controller, afflicter, and single target focusser is now your HEALER and party buffer too. Oh excuse me, I'm selling things short. BG2 lets your Cleric/mage spell caster also be a fighter. So now he's a Nuker, Buffer, Debuffer, Crowd Controller, afflicter, single target focusser, Healer AND TANK.

 

2) BG2 mages have access to Project Image and Simularcum, 2 spells we have not discussed here yet, because we haven't really needed to discuss them, because no one was crazy enough to continue the absurdity of a BG2 vs. PoE spell comparison discussion to such a comprehensive degree until about a page ago. In any case, Yes. These two spells open up a 4th dimension. No need for another class (or even a second mage), when a single mage in BG2 can literally become several fully functional mages, all of them possessing the ability to cast spells, simultaneously. Excuse me, we're selling this one short too. Ever heard of the famous Throne of Bhaal army of cheese? Let me see if I can run it down for us. In about 4 rounds, a single mage can become 6 more mages, who proceed to summon 6 planetars. Of course, these Planetars themselves are super deadly spellcasters who, individually, can solo any fight in Shadows of Amn. But you've got 6 of them, being controlled by 6 mages, who were created by your Party's ONE mage....in about 4 rounds.

 

But I digress, Lets talk about a PoE wizard's Hit chance with Fan of Flames!

Edited November 15, 2014 by Stun

[Yonjuro]

Interestingly enough, that STILL doesn't even things up. For a couple of pretty gigantic reasons. ....

 

 These are very good examples. PoE is a lower level campaign, so it's ok with me if we don't see spells like simulacrum, but PoE 2 and PoE 3, wherever the franchise goes, really needs a magic system with the complexity that we saw in BG2 (or better, I'm totally ok with better  ).

 

 If a level 25 wizard is casting Minoletta's BFG9000 and little else, that isn't good enough. The magic system needs interesting interactions between spells or the games won't have the same replay value as the BG series.

[David Frohman]

I really don't understand what this debate is about, but then again as far as I'm concerned all spellcasters are spellcasters. Cleric, Druid, Wizard, Chanter, whatever, spellcaster. They're all the same class to me. They're usually funner to play than fighters because they get more options. If the class called 'wizard' is weak, I really don't care, and I don't understand why other people would care.

 

I don't really like damage dealing spells. They're boring. Divinity Original sin, I guess, did a good job of using elements and environmental effects to make attack spells interesting. With the help of awesome graphics!

 

___

 

Casters need the ability to blind people, to trip them and knock them down, to make them unable to distinguish friend from foe, and to be able to cure or undo the effects of other casters. (buff and debuff in mechanical terms). They don't need the ability to actually do any damage.

 

Stealthies need to dance around the edge of combat, attacking units that have weakened in the behind, hunting casters, and using single target ranged attacks, occasionally getting sucked in by undistracted fighters.

 

Fighters need to bash each other in the face in an ugly mess in the center of the map while the casters and steathies dance around the outside, and the side that runs out of fighters first loses.

 

___

 

But more important than all that! FAR more important! Everything needs to look cool. If someone is blinded, I want to be able to see it, the black cloud in front of their face. If someone is tripped I want to see them fall over and have to stand back up! If someone is grabbed by a vine, I want to see that vine crawl up his legs and grab his arms! If someone is suddenly glowing in the dark, negating their stealth skill, I wanna see them glow! If someone is frozen, I wanna see their hair turn white and frost form across their skin! If they're burned, I want to see them on fire!

 

You can make wizards as powerful or as weak as you want, if the spell animations and status effect animations are not there to support it, they'll just be boring.

 

 

So... make it look good! Make it LOOK good, make it look BEAUTIFUL! PLEASE!

 

Also make the fighters punching themselves and each other in the face look entertaining, please. That'll probably take a few hundred combat animations by itself.

Edited November 15, 2014 by David Frohman

[Malekith]

Stun, on 15 Nov 2014 - 03:50 AM, said:

 

Doppelschwert, on 15 Nov 2014 - 01:00 AM, said:

Instead of two wizards in an IE games you can have any combination of wizard / cipher / chanter in PoE to more or less get the same number of spells per category per spell level, because summons, crowd control, afflictions and damage spells are all covered with these three classes.

Aah, you're trying to cite total party ability coverage in PoE to.... what a wizard can do by himself in a game like BG2...?

 

Interestingly enough, that STILL doesn't even things up. For a couple of pretty gigantic reasons.

 

1) You can Multi-class your mage in BG2. Your mage can literally be a cleric as well. This opens up a 3rd dimension as, your summoner, Nuker, debuffer, crowd controller, afflicter, and single target focusser is now your HEALER and party buffer too. Oh excuse me, I'm selling things short. BG2 lets your Cleric/mage spell caster also be a fighter. So now he's a Nuker, Buffer, Debuffer, Crowd Controller, afflicter, single target focusser, Healer AND TANK.

 

2) BG2 mages have access to Project Image and Simularcum, 2 spells we have not discussed here yet, because we haven't really needed to discuss them, because no one was crazy enough to continue the absurdity of a BG2 vs. PoE spell comparison discussion to such a comprehensive degree until about a page ago. In any case, Yes. These two spells open up a 4th dimension. No need for another class (or even a second mage), when a single mage in BG2 can literally become several fully functional mages, all of them possessing the ability to cast spells, simultaneously. Excuse me, we're selling this one short too. Ever heard of the famous Throne of Bhaal army of cheese? Let me see if I can run it down for us. In about 4 rounds, a single mage can become 6 more mages, who proceed to summon 6 planetars. Of course, these Planetars themselves are super deadly spellcasters who, individually, can solo any fight in Shadows of Amn. But you've got 6 of them, being controlled by 6 mages, who were created by your Party's ONE mage....in about 4 rounds.

 

But I digress, Lets talk about a PoE wizard's Hit chance with Fan of Flames!

 

You just described Josh Sawyer's nightmare. He disliked all of these in BG2  

[Seari]

-

here you go kid => epic grafix - if you click a button something awesome happens!

[Doppelschwert]

You know, I just typed up a response to the points each of you adressed, but for a good part there will be no respectful discussion here, no matter how much effort I put into it, so I deleted it. In fact, it can be easily summed up:

 

You guys think its great to have an omnipotent class that is basically able to do anything in a game, and that is fine. I think it's not much fun because that makes it a clear better choice every single time, devaluing everything else in the game.

I feel like your points are valid (but coming down to preference), but you blow them out of proportions, so feel free to disagree.

 

I'll probably get a game that I'll enjoy more than you guys will, and I can live with that conclusion.

For the rest, we'll just have to agree to disagree.

Edited November 15, 2014 by Doppelschwert

[Kjaamor]

I think you're missing something important. When you lose invisibility spells, you aren't losing one thing, you're losing all of the interactions with the other spells. There's the saying that fighters are linear and mages are quadratic. That's almost literally true - the interesting thing is the interaction of the spells. The spells in PoE don't seem to have as many interesting uses and interesting interactions.

 

 I could be wrong. If so, show me how the spells combine.

 

Nice post generally, but it sounds like you're misunderstanding the concept of Quadratic Mages and why they are so.

 

The 'Quadratic' in Quadratic mages refers to the increase of their power as the gain levels. Not only do they gain new high-powered spells, but their existing spells (Think Magic Missile for the best example) also increase in power.

[Stun]

You know, I just typed up a response to the points each of you adressed, but for a good part there will be no respectful discussion here, no matter how much effort I put into it, so I deleted it. In fact, it can be easily summed up:

 

You guys think its great to have an omnipotent class that is basically able to do anything in a game, and that is fine. I think it's not much fun because that makes it a clear better choice every single time, devaluing everything else in the game.

That didn't happen in Bg2, did it. In BG2, mages were very much omnipotent, as you say, in every role conceivable except perhaps melee (and once you got shapechange, EVEN melee...especially melee lol)

 

But funny thing... I had more fun with my various sneak build runs (Rogues, Stalkers). Much of that had to do with the increased challenge, of course. But the main reason was because of ROLE PLAYING. People always forget this. Especially the Balance-firsters, like Josh. They forget that we're talking about a ROLE PLAYING game, not some PvP MMO. When you're role playing, the question of: "Is the class I chose just as powerful as the other classes?" is not relevant. It's not relevant because power differentials do not matter. There are only 2 things that matter in a role playing game:

 

1) Does the class possess enough skills to beat the game/overcome the game's challenges?

2) Does this class feel unique?

 

BG2 (and all the IE games) get away with having an imbalanced magic system because they absolutely nail #1 and #2.

[Dark_Ansem]

It needs either mana-points or spell recharge like unearthed arcana (all spellcasting classes need this, I think).

no ifs or buts.

[Doppelschwert]

 

You know, I just typed up a response to the points each of you adressed, but for a good part there will be no respectful discussion here, no matter how much effort I put into it, so I deleted it. In fact, it can be easily summed up:

 

You guys think its great to have an omnipotent class that is basically able to do anything in a game, and that is fine. I think it's not much fun because that makes it a clear better choice every single time, devaluing everything else in the game.

That didn't happen in Bg2, did it. In BG2, mages were very much omnipotent, as you say, in every role conceivable except perhaps melee (and once you got shapechange, EVEN melee...especially melee lol)

 

But funny thing... I had more fun with my various sneak build runs (Rogues, Stalkers). Much of that had to do with the increased challenge, of course. But the main reason was because of ROLE PLAYING. People always forget this. Especially the Balance-firsters, like Josh. They forget that we're talking about a ROLE PLAYING game, not some PvP MMO. When you're role playing, the question of: "Is the class I chose just as powerful as the other classes?" is not relevant. It's not relevant because power differentials do not matter. There are only 2 things that matter in a role playing game:

 

1) Does the class possess enough skills to beat the game/overcome the game's challenges?

2) Does this class feel unique?

 

BG2 (and all the IE games) get away with having an imbalanced magic system because they absolutely nail #1 and #2.

 

 

PoEs design goals and Joshs motivation are very much 1) and 2) in my eyes. Access to effects are split up more or less evenly between all classes and they have unique mechanics for the most part. I'm also sure that 1) will eventually be met with proper balancing.

 

By that logic, shouldn't get PoE away with a balanced magic system? If you disagree whether PoE achieves 1) and 2) or not, do I understand you correctly that a game that has balanced magic would be perfectly fine if it satisfied constraints 1) and 2)?

 

This seems orthogonal to your arguments before, so I'm not sure I understand you correctly on this.

[Kjaamor]

That didn't happen in Bg2, did it. In BG2, mages were very much omnipotent, as you say, in every role conceivable except perhaps melee (and once you got shapechange, EVEN melee...especially melee lol)

But funny thing... I had more fun with my various sneak build runs (Rogues, Stalkers). Much of that had to do with the increased challenge, of course. But the main reason was because of ROLE PLAYING. People always forget this. Especially the Balance-firsters, like Josh. They forget that we're talking about a ROLE PLAYING game, not some PvP MMO. When you're role playing, the question of: "Is the class I chose just as powerful as the other classes?" is not relevant. It's not relevant because power differentials do not matter. There are only 2 things that matter in a role playing game:

 

1) Does the class possess enough skills to beat the game/overcome the game's challenges?

2) Does this class feel unique?

 

BG2 (and all the IE games) get away with having an imbalanced magic system because they absolutely nail #1 and #2.

 

One of these days, Stun, you're going to have to get over the fact that most people choose to play these games as games to be beaten rather than role play them, and that most people who role play do not use crpgs as their main vehicle for it.

[Yonjuro]

 

I think you're missing something important. When you lose invisibility spells, you aren't losing one thing, you're losing all of the interactions with the other spells. There's the saying that fighters are linear and mages are quadratic. That's almost literally true - the interesting thing is the interaction of the spells. The spells in PoE don't seem to have as many interesting uses and interesting interactions.

 

 I could be wrong. If so, show me how the spells combine.

 

Nice post generally, but it sounds like you're misunderstanding the concept of Quadratic Mages and why they are so.

 

The 'Quadratic' in Quadratic mages refers to the increase of their power as the gain levels. Not only do they gain new high-powered spells, but their existing spells (Think Magic Missile for the best example) also increase in power.

 

 

 

  Yes, I understand where it comes from. I was co-opting the phrase to mean something else to make my point.

 

  Namely that if you lose a capability you lose the option to combine it with all of your other capabilities.

 

  Phrase co-option fail, I guess. 

[Stun]

By that logic, shouldn't get PoE away with a balanced magic system? If you disagree whether PoE achieves 1) and 2) or not, do I understand you correctly that a game that has balanced magic would be perfectly fine if it satisfied constraints 1) and 2)?

Not. A rigidly balanced magic system that adheres to the very same rules, structure, effects and delivery methods that govern melee/archery would NOT achieve #2. There's nothing unique about a class who's attack forms mirror just about every other class's.

 

And PoE's beta is the quintessential 'Exhibit A' here. In combat, My ranged rogue playthrough did not feel different from my Mage Playthrough, aside from the occasional Fireball my mage was able to toss at the start of a few of the battles. They were essentially the same friggin characters. To be fair though, much of this probably had to do with the fact that PoE has total balance across the board (every class can wield every weapon, every class can wear every armor etc)

 

It's just DULL design.

Edited November 15, 2014 by Stun

[Yonjuro]

You guys think its great to have an omnipotent class that is basically able to do anything in a game, and that is fine. I think it's not much fun because that makes it a clear better choice every single time, devaluing everything else in the game.

I feel like your points are valid (but coming down to preference), but you blow them out of proportions, so feel free to disagree.

 

 

 That's one way to look at it. Another way to look at it is that part of roleplay in a roleplaying game is how you can use the capabilities of your character/party to solve the problems that the game throws at you. 

 

  The mage class in the BG series is powerful but it doesn't come with an "I win" button. You need to use the capabilities correctly and the seriously overpowered tactics that you have (such as Stun's second example) are complex to figure out and difficult to do correctly. That's why the class is as interesting to play as it is.

 

 Earlier, I asked the question if the spells in PoE, from all of the classes, not just wizards, combine in the same interesting ways as the IE spell system and for examples. I judge by the dead silence from everyone that the answer is no.

 

 I don't want to put words into anyone's mouth. If you disagree with me, I'm happy to hear the examples.

 

 

 If you get nothing else from any of my posts, understand this: For me, it would be fine if wizard spells and chanter spells combined in one way, wizard and cipher spells combined in another interesting and equally powerful way - having all three would open up new possibilities etc.  That would also add replay value to the game. I don't object to balance, I object to achieving balance by removing all of the powerful things from the game.   

 

  BG2 is still near the top of the best games list at metacritic. Whatever you think of metacritic, it's pretty interesting that people still like a game with relatively primitive tech. a decade and a half after it's release. It isn't there because it is balanced, it's there because it's still fun to play. Partly because there are new things to learn about how to play a character.

[Stun]

Earlier, I asked the question if the spells in PoE, from all of the classes, not just wizards, combine in the same interesting ways as the IE spell system and for examples. I judge by the dead silence from everyone that the answer is no.

I certainly can't figure any out from the list of spells that have been released to us. Or at least I can't see any of the 'Stinking cloud + Animate dead combo" nature.

 

I have noticed some cross-class potential though. Mages and Ciphers have spells that can hobble/prone an opponent, and then Rogues can take advantage of the affliction state to do massive sneak attack damage. I suppose we can stand up and cheer for that, at least. But to me that just reiterates the point that mages have been nerfed so severely in PoE that they're now just a support class.

Edited November 15, 2014 by Stun

[Dark_Ansem]

I agree with Yonjuro, to a great extent. While balance needs to be kept, the fear of overpowered shouldn't hamper things, they can always be fixed up later!

[Quadrone]

I really don't understand what this debate is about, but then again as far as I'm concerned all spellcasters are spellcasters. Cleric, Druid, Wizard, Chanter, whatever, spellcaster. They're all the same class to me. They're usually funner to play than fighters because they get more options. If the class called 'wizard' is weak, I really don't care, and I don't understand why other people would care.

 

I don't really like damage dealing spells. They're boring. Divinity Original sin, I guess, did a good job of using elements and environmental effects to make attack spells interesting. With the help of awesome graphics!

 

___

 

Casters need the ability to blind people, to trip them and knock them down, to make them unable to distinguish friend from foe, and to be able to cure or undo the effects of other casters. (buff and debuff in mechanical terms). They don't need the ability to actually do any damage.

 

Stealthies need to dance around the edge of combat, attacking units that have weakened in the behind, hunting casters, and using single target ranged attacks, occasionally getting sucked in by undistracted fighters.

 

Fighters need to bash each other in the face in an ugly mess in the center of the map while the casters and steathies dance around the outside, and the side that runs out of fighters first loses.

 

___

 

But more important than all that! FAR more important! Everything needs to look cool. If someone is blinded, I want to be able to see it, the black cloud in front of their face. If someone is tripped I want to see them fall over and have to stand back up! If someone is grabbed by a vine, I want to see that vine crawl up his legs and grab his arms! If someone is suddenly glowing in the dark, negating their stealth skill, I wanna see them glow! If someone is frozen, I wanna see their hair turn white and frost form across their skin! If they're burned, I want to see them on fire!

 

You can make wizards as powerful or as weak as you want, if the spell animations and status effect animations are not there to support it, they'll just be boring.

 

 

So... make it look good! Make it LOOK good, make it look BEAUTIFUL! PLEASE!

 

Also make the fighters punching themselves and each other in the face look entertaining, please. That'll probably take a few hundred combat animations by itself.

 

What.

Is this some next level satire?

[Doppelschwert]

 

By that logic, shouldn't get PoE away with a balanced magic system? If you disagree whether PoE achieves 1) and 2) or not, do I understand you correctly that a game that has balanced magic would be perfectly fine if it satisfied constraints 1) and 2)?

Not. A rigidly balanced magic system that adheres to the very same rules, structure, effects and delivery methods that govern melee/archery would NOT achieve #2. There's nothing unique about a class who's attack forms mirror just about every other class's.

 

And PoE's beta is the quintessential 'Exhibit A' here. In combat, My ranged rogue playthrough did not feel different from my Mage Playthrough, aside from the occasional Fireball my mage was able to toss at the start of a few of the battles. They were essentially the same friggin characters. To be fair though, much of this probably had to do with the fact that PoE has total balance across the board (every class can wield every weapon, every class can wear every armor etc)

 

It's just DULL design.

 

 

Ok, but you still haven't answered my second, more important question. A game could have a very unique magic system, where magic sucks in combat. Would that be fine?

 

 

You guys think its great to have an omnipotent class that is basically able to do anything in a game, and that is fine. I think it's not much fun because that makes it a clear better choice every single time, devaluing everything else in the game.

I feel like your points are valid (but coming down to preference), but you blow them out of proportions, so feel free to disagree.

 

 

 That's one way to look at it. Another way to look at it is that part of roleplay in a roleplaying game is how you can use the capabilities of your character/party to solve the problems that the game throws at you. 

 

  The mage class in the BG series is powerful but it doesn't come with an "I win" button. You need to use the capabilities correctly and the seriously overpowered tactics that you have (such as Stun's second example) are complex to figure out and difficult to do correctly. That's why the class is as interesting to play as it is.

 

 Earlier, I asked the question if the spells in PoE, from all of the classes, not just wizards, combine in the same interesting ways as the IE spell system and for examples. I judge by the dead silence from everyone that the answer is no.

 

 I don't want to put words into anyone's mouth. If you disagree with me, I'm happy to hear the examples.

 

 

 If you get nothing else from any of my posts, understand this: For me, it would be fine if wizard spells and chanter spells combined in one way, wizard and cipher spells combined in another interesting and equally powerful way - having all three would open up new possibilities etc.  That would also add replay value to the game. I don't object to balance, I object to achieving balance by removing all of the powerful things from the game.   

 

  BG2 is still near the top of the best games list at metacritic. Whatever you think of metacritic, it's pretty interesting that people still like a game with relatively primitive tech. a decade and a half after it's release. It isn't there because it is balanced, it's there because it's still fun to play. Partly because there are new things to learn about how to play a character.

 

 

I see where you are coming from and I got something out of your posts before as well. As I said, I think its just about personal preference.

 

Its hard to come up with interesting spell combos because I don't really know what you'd consider interesting. Compared to BG1, in PoE you basically can't cast outside of combat, there is no magic invisibility and no instadeath / immunity spells. Apart from that, every spell effect should more or less be in the game on some class, so you can decide yourself whether there are interesting effects/tactics.

For example, I don't think it's a problem to have a cloudkill ambush, it's just harder/different to pull off. Instead of summons, you use a character with an escape ability to bait them and then you immobilize them in the cloudkill with some control spell. Maybe you can also utilize traps in some way.

[Stun]

Ok, but you still haven't answered my second, more important question. A game could have a very unique magic system, where magic sucks in combat. Would that be fine?

Would what be fine? The combat? The classes? Or the castrated magic system?

 

My personal preference in a fantasy RPG is a powerful, dynamic magic system that is only 'balanced" within itself. But that being said, if developers manage to make all the classes unique, and the melee/ranged/stealth aspects of combat exceptionally good, I'll probably be Ok with the system as a whole.

 

But we don't need to talk about what-ifs, nor does PoE's combat get the luxury of being passable if it half-asses its magic system but keeps all classes feeling unique. THEY CITED the IE games, and they even name-dropped Icewind dale's combat. Those games were built around magic. Magic was the strong point of the combat in those games. Therefore, they have a high bar to reach and expectations to meet, despite what Josh might think.

Edited November 15, 2014 by Stun

[Doppelschwert]

Fine, I just wanted to know where you're coming from exactly, so thanks for this.

[rheingold]

"You guys think its great to have an omnipotent class that is basically able to do anything in a game, and that is fine. I think it's not much fun because that makes it a clear better choice every single time, devaluing everything else in the game."

 

This +1000

 

Just listen to yourselves , how can you possibly expect Obsidan to take you seriously. You are upset because you can't make an all powerful god like character. Balance in this game is probably important to a lot of people. Obsidan is a business and they have to make sure that the game has a wider appeal than a couple of hardcore gamers hanging around a forum. The bottom line , is that the people posting here - including me, do not speak for the majority of players. It's critical that Obsidan (and other companies) understand this, and make a game that will sell. So yeah, they are not likely to jump every time a few loud people cry.

[Stun]

Just listen to yourselves , how can you possibly expect Obsidan to take you seriously. You are upset because you can't make an all powerful god like character. Balance in this game is probably important to a lot of people. Obsidan is a business and they have to make sure that the game has a wider appeal than a couple of hardcore gamers hanging around a forum. The bottom line , is that the people posting here - including me, do not speak for the majority of players. It's critical that Obsidan (and other companies) understand this, and make a game that will sell. So yeah, they are not likely to jump every time a few loud people cry.

Indeed. That's the reason why they did PoE through Kickstarter instead of a giant Publisher: To appeal to the widest audience possible.... the non-hardcore gamer. To tap into Bethesda and Blizzard's multi-millions-strong fanbase. I get it.

 

Still not sure why they deliberately chose to sabotage their own advertising campaign by name-dropping games like Planescape Torment and Icewind Dale, though. Those games sold, what, half a million copies each? "Wider appeal" and "PS:T" are mutually exclusive concepts. Obsidian must have garden rodents running their marketing department.

Edited November 15, 2014 by Stun