666 réponses à ce sujet

[chizow]

Unbroken Lineage wrote...

Kahryl wrote...
I should be able to choose the party members I like the most personally rather than the ones that will fit the difficulty I want and that the game should be giving me in the first place.

Where does this expectation come from?  In what games have you had this experience?  In what party-based fantasy RPGs have you had the experience that you could just put together any old party build combination and have the same experience (of difficulty, tactics, fun and so on) as any other party build combination?

I know I've asked this question before, but no one has answered it.  I believe no one has answered it because there are no such games.  I believe this expectation is completely unreasonable, and completely at odds with 25+ years of party-based fantasy RPGs.  I don't know where this expectation comes from, but it certainly does not come from playing party-based fantasy RPGs.

Actually I did answer it on numerous occasions, there's numerous other games that allow for multiple alternatives and *gasp* choice *gasp* to accomplish similar results.  In Dragon Age that's not the case, as 1 class is an amalgamation of all of those previous choices that just so happens to do all of those functions *better* than every other class. 

I've also asked you this question numerous times as to why you or anyone else could continually try and justify the current state of the game as "working as intended" and reason enough not to make any changes to other classes.  When in the history of gaming has it been acceptable to make one class or choice so overwhelmingly overpowered that it largely invalidates all other classes/playstyles and essentially forces you to continuously play the game in a similar fashion with the same few non-interchangeable NPC characters?

[Pocketgb]

F-C wrote...


no the issue is that a few people such as yourself, schyzm, pocket, and aberdash have this over-inflated sense of entitlement and think what you dont like is broken and needs to be changed.


the reality is the game is balanced how the developers envisioned it to be, based on the lore and world of the game.

I don't see anything about 2h and archery specs being lackluster in the lore...Nor do I see anything about a Rogue being able to take on entire hordes by himself.

And even if these things were mentioned in the lore that would be the only grounds on which the game is balanced - and that's part of our discontent: the game is not balanced on the classes' own merits. Some specs are evidently strong, others are glaringly weak. If that's what the lore demands then, well, honestly, that would have to be some pretty yucky lore D:

Also note that if a developer says "everything is working as intended", that would also include obvious glitches and exploits - meaning either they're totally fine with those exploits, or we shouldn't take him too seriously. Given that it's Dom, I'd go with the latter : p

[Schyzm]

DragoonKain3 wrote...

Schyzm wrote...


because I"m not a powergamer.  I couldn't tell you if mass paarlyze is better or worse than fireball, I know they're both amazingly awesome.  why do you demand I know to the exact spell what all the best spells are?  including differentiating between bunches of amazingly powerful spells?  I'm sorry but I do not.  I guess you are a superior powergamer to me, I bow to your supreme awesome exactness.

So then how exactly can you tell me then that certain spells in the buiild I offered are 'bad', or that certain spells are 'the best spells that they can reasonably get their hand on'?

And that's exactly what I'm getting at. You're not a power gamer, so you can NOT tell me which spells are suboptimal and which ones are optimal. Even the concept of tradeoffs seems to be lost on you, since you seem to be under the impression that a mage can do everything well, everything at once, which is hardly the case at all considering they're under serious constraints of talent picks.

That's the reason why I keep on saying that a mage can only be a truly good wizard, or a truly good cleric, or something in between, but not truly good at both at once, since they don't have the talent points to get all the spells. Which btw, is the main topic we're currently arguing about, since it was you who refuted such claims in the beginning, and I am confident that my original claim still stands since you, not being a powergamer, cannot refute it.

"shimmering shield exploits" indeed another mage spell so powerful its mere use is called an exploit.  I think you using the word exploit on a mage spell should give you a hint as to how crazy mages are.

Shimmering Shield is an exploit because it does NOT turn off when you run out of mana. It's very powerful in its own right, but as it is right now its only limitation is entirely bypassed.  And no its not intentional, as EVERY OTHER SUSTAINED SPELL/TALENT that drains mana/stamina, turns off when you run out of mana/stamina.

really? show me the dragon age quote it isn't intentional.  like I said it's an obvious mechanic just like forcefield.  Unless you pull out a quote that they simply overlooked it or its a weird bug then I'm gna go with the much simpler and more realistic explanation in that they intended that mechanic for shimmering shield.

and you're ridiculously grossly wrong.  a mage is not required by any mechanic in the game to specialize ever.  in your sad ass excuse for a "support" mage build you just took every spell that even remotely looked like a support spell and ignored very easy to get very powerful spells....for...absolutely....no....reason.  there is no mechanic in the character creation of a mage that requires you in any way to specialize and much less to ignore powerful spells that are easy to get.  I don't know why you want to continue down this bizarre line of reasoning.  if you like making weirdo builds that roleplay a certain type of mage for you then go for it.  

[montana_boy]

Does the game need rebalancing?



Of Course!



Every RPG or RTS ever released needed rebalancing... goes with the territory.

[Unbroken Lineage]

Schyzm wrote...

Unbroken Lineage wrote...

Kahryl wrote...
I should be able to choose the party members I like the most personally rather than the ones that will fit the difficulty I want and that the game should be giving me in the first place.

Where does this expectation come from?  In what games have you had this experience?  In what party-based fantasy RPGs have you had the experience that you could just put together any old party build combination and have the same experience (of difficulty, tactics, fun and so on) as any other party build combination?

I know I've asked this question before, but no one has answered it.  I believe no one has answered it because there are no such games.  I believe this expectation is completely unreasonable, and completely at odds with 25+ years of party-based fantasy RPGs.  I don't know where this expectation comes from, but it certainly does not come from playing party-based fantasy RPGs.

I've had much more balanced multi party composition fun in every other party based rpg I've ever played.  the absurdity of mages being defended based on bizarre parsing of questions is somewhat offensive.  there's no good game design reason to give mages every good ability in the game and then give them an infinite resource pool and leave warriors and rogues god damn auto attacking.  the fanboi defenses should come down to earth.

Is that the meat of your complaint then?  That Warriors and Rogues are at their best when you invest in passive abilities rather than activated abilities?  It looks to me like they designed the Warriors and Rogues that way, much like most RPGs over the past 25+ years have designed non-spellcasters that way.  I don't think Dragon Age as initially release or as supported in the future by BioWare is the game for you, because I don't think Warriors or Rogues will be redesigned that radically.  I think your best bet is to play another game, or keep your fingers crossed that a Mod comes out with new classes or radically redesigned Warriors and Rogues.

[F-C]

i just cant help but laugh at the responses that are coming out now. its been proven rogues can do insane damage, more than mages overall damage in a lot of cases. not just single target, but overall in a lot of cases.

its been proven that you can solo the game with a rogue on the hardest setting. people have successfully beat the game with a melee party only using wynn as a healbot. on and on.

yet you still get these people insisting that the game boils down to all mages are you fail.

its a joke really only worthy of being laughed at.


the developers designed this game to play how it currently is. they have even told you that directly before the other forums closed down.

to compensate for anything you dont like they have provided you with a toolkit to change the game to your personal needs.

its their game, they made it how they want it to be, and gave you the resources to adjust it to your needs on top of that.



get off of your pedestals and enjoy the game, stop being babies.

Modifié par F-C, 18 novembre 2009 - 08:51 .

[chizow]

Here's the problem I see, there's the same few apologists defending Bioware's design decisions and implying its perfectly acceptable for them to do nothing to modify the game from its original design.  So let me ask of those people:

• 1) Do you think the game is without problems and therefore, wouldn't benefit from any modifications, minor or major?
• 2) If you don't agree with #1, why wouldn't you advocate and lobby for changes from Bioware that would benefit everyone?

We already know for a fact there are numerous bugs and issues clearly not "working as intended", even a few covered in the last 5 pages of replies regarding sustained toggles and mana drain.  There's countless more.  Why wouldn't you expect Bioware to fix these problems along with other issues the vast majority of users see as potential for improvement?  That's great that Bioware has supplied a toolkit for the enterprising modders out there, but I think the overwhelming majority of end-users expect more in the way of support and would much prefer to see fixes that benefit everyone.....

[Schyzm]

Unbroken Lineage wrote...

Schyzm wrote...

Unbroken Lineage wrote...

Kahryl wrote...
I should be able to choose the party members I like the most personally rather than the ones that will fit the difficulty I want and that the game should be giving me in the first place.

Where does this expectation come from?  In what games have you had this experience?  In what party-based fantasy RPGs have you had the experience that you could just put together any old party build combination and have the same experience (of difficulty, tactics, fun and so on) as any other party build combination?

I know I've asked this question before, but no one has answered it.  I believe no one has answered it because there are no such games.  I believe this expectation is completely unreasonable, and completely at odds with 25+ years of party-based fantasy RPGs.  I don't know where this expectation comes from, but it certainly does not come from playing party-based fantasy RPGs.

I've had much more balanced multi party composition fun in every other party based rpg I've ever played.  the absurdity of mages being defended based on bizarre parsing of questions is somewhat offensive.  there's no good game design reason to give mages every good ability in the game and then give them an infinite resource pool and leave warriors and rogues god damn auto attacking.  the fanboi defenses should come down to earth.

Is that the meat of your complaint then?  That Warriors and Rogues are at their best when you invest in passive abilities rather than activated abilities?  It looks to me like they designed the Warriors and Rogues that way, much like most RPGs over the past 25+ years have designed non-spellcasters that way.  I don't think Dragon Age as initially release or as supported in the future by BioWare is the game for you, because I don't think Warriors or Rogues will be redesigned that radically.  I think your best bet is to play another game, or keep your fingers crossed that a Mod comes out with new classes or radically redesigned Warriors and Rogues.

first of all building warriors and rogues around auto attacking is the old and busted 10 years ago way of doing it.  it's very disappointing in an era where warriors are actually given cool abilities to regress the rpg genre a decade by forcing them into auto attack reliance.  

also I seriously find it hilarious that your'e defending the uselessness of the activated abilities "fourth tier warrior ablities inferior to auto attack?  working as intended for this fanboi!"  It's like there's nothing no matter how dumbly made or poorly balanced that a fanboi won't just mindlessly defend.

[Kahryl]

F-C wrote...

get off of your pedestals and enjoy the game, stop being babies.

It's weird that you keep saying that when you've made twice as many posts on this topic as I have.  Half of which have amounted to "stop making posts about this topic" do you understand how ridiculous that is?

If you're interested in discussing mages and how they fit into the game, post away.

If you're not interested, go elsewhere.

Trying to convince us that you're somehow above it all while you hammer and hammer at your point just makes you look pathetic.

[F-C]

chizow wrote...


[*] issues the vast majority of users see

its hard to take anything you say seriously when you think the same trolls posting over and over i can count on one hand equals the vast majority of users.

[Unbroken Lineage]

chizow wrote...

Unbroken Lineage wrote...

Kahryl wrote...
I should be able to choose the party members I like the most personally rather than the ones that will fit the difficulty I want and that the game should be giving me in the first place.

Where does this expectation come from?  In what games have you had this experience?  In what party-based fantasy RPGs have you had the experience that you could just put together any old party build combination and have the same experience (of difficulty, tactics, fun and so on) as any other party build combination?

I know I've asked this question before, but no one has answered it.  I believe no one has answered it because there are no such games.  I believe this expectation is completely unreasonable, and completely at odds with 25+ years of party-based fantasy RPGs.  I don't know where this expectation comes from, but it certainly does not come from playing party-based fantasy RPGs.

Actually I did answer it on numerous occasions, there's numerous other games that allow for multiple alternatives and *gasp* choice *gasp* to accomplish similar results.  In Dragon Age that's not the case, as 1 class is an amalgamation of all of those previous choices that just so happens to do all of those functions *better* than every other class. 

I've also asked you this question numerous times as to why you or anyone else could continually try and justify the current state of the game as "working as intended" and reason enough not to make any changes to other classes.  When in the history of gaming has it been acceptable to make one class or choice so overwhelmingly overpowered that it largely invalidates all other classes/playstyles and essentially forces you to continuously play the game in a similar fashion with the same few non-interchangeable NPC characters?

I'm sorry, I missed the game names in your responses.  Could you compile them in a list here again?

The game doesn't force anything on anyone.  You can roll a party however you like.  You just have to accept the tradeoffs, and plan accordingly.  It's obvious that this game is balanced for 1 Warrior Tank, 1 Single-Target DPS Rogue, 1 AOE DPS/CC Mage, 1 Healer Mage.  History is over-ripe with this formula.  Why this is offensive, I do not know.  

There's nothing at all stopping you from deviating from the standard default party build in any game.  But like any game, when you do deviate you must compensate, and this game like any game gives you all of the tools you need to do so.  If this weren't the case, then Nightmare wouldn't be possible with Tank/Archer/Archer/Healer, and yet it is.

[Haexpane]

Unbroken Lineage wrote...

Haexpane wrote...
It's annoying to realize how much slower everything is w/ my warrior.  I intentionally do NOT use most of the over powered mage abilities just so I can have more fun w/ my PC.

I should not have to "pretend" a spell or build doesnt exist because it's too overpowered.

This response people always give of "your arm hurts when you do that? don't do that" is just trolling.

Hey, that's what I do.  Looks like we're both having fun, playing the way we'd like to play.  Why is this a problem?

It's a problem because the gameplay radically changes when I use a mage's spells.  If you buy a pizza and there is too much sauce on it, would't you tell the pizza maker "Hey, way too much sauce on this" or would you just eat it anyway and pretend there wasn't?

Bioware PATCHES their games, they have since BG2.  The expectation for a balance patch is routine.  Why people are so anti balance is a bit mind boggling.  But my experience tells me is it's because they like exploiting the uber powerful AW build

[F-C]

Kahryl wrote...

Trying to convince us that you're somehow above it all while you hammer and hammer at your point just makes you look pathetic.

im happy with the current game and im not trying to nerf-herd.

thats the difference.

[SheffSteel]

Is it possible to write a mod that would make enemies ignore a target they have failed to damage (e.g. because it's inside a Force Field)? If so, then mods can solve the problems that the devs didn't. But personally I suspect that such a change might need to be made in code.

[BlueEyes_Austin]

Schyzm wrote...
balance has always been a consideration to making good games.  even single player ones.  dnd considers balance, because balance provides a better experience and allows players who want to delve into the tactics and strategy of the game a rich and interesting environment.  instead of having the place littered with broken mechanics that reward creativity and intelligence with ruining combat.

You keep saying this.  It keeps not being true.

[Schyzm]

Unbroken Lineage wrote...

chizow wrote...

Unbroken Lineage wrote...

Kahryl wrote...
I should be able to choose the party members I like the most personally rather than the ones that will fit the difficulty I want and that the game should be giving me in the first place.

Where does this expectation come from?  In what games have you had this experience?  In what party-based fantasy RPGs have you had the experience that you could just put together any old party build combination and have the same experience (of difficulty, tactics, fun and so on) as any other party build combination?

I know I've asked this question before, but no one has answered it.  I believe no one has answered it because there are no such games.  I believe this expectation is completely unreasonable, and completely at odds with 25+ years of party-based fantasy RPGs.  I don't know where this expectation comes from, but it certainly does not come from playing party-based fantasy RPGs.

Actually I did answer it on numerous occasions, there's numerous other games that allow for multiple alternatives and *gasp* choice *gasp* to accomplish similar results.  In Dragon Age that's not the case, as 1 class is an amalgamation of all of those previous choices that just so happens to do all of those functions *better* than every other class. 

I've also asked you this question numerous times as to why you or anyone else could continually try and justify the current state of the game as "working as intended" and reason enough not to make any changes to other classes.  When in the history of gaming has it been acceptable to make one class or choice so overwhelmingly overpowered that it largely invalidates all other classes/playstyles and essentially forces you to continuously play the game in a similar fashion with the same few non-interchangeable NPC characters?

I'm sorry, I missed the game names in your responses.  Could you compile them in a list here again?

The game doesn't force anything on anyone.  You can roll a party however you like.  You just have to accept the tradeoffs, and plan accordingly.  It's obvious that this game is balanced for 1 Warrior Tank, 1 Single-Target DPS Rogue, 1 AOE DPS/CC Mage, 1 Healer Mage.  History is over-ripe with this formula.  Why this is offensive, I do not know.  

There's nothing at all stopping you from deviating from the standard default party build in any game.  But like any game, when you do deviate you must compensate, and this game like any game gives you all of the tools you need to do so.  If this weren't the case, then Nightmare wouldn't be possible with Tank/Archer/Archer/Healer, and yet it is.

this idiocy has to stop now, you're saying bioware intends you to, under threat of punishment by having your party suck.  always take both npc mages, or have made a pc mage yourself.  that's just absurd and please stop promoting that distorted view of dragon age reality.  

I'm sure that was bioware's intent "take both npc mages every time OR SUFFER!!!!!"  some ppl....

[Unbroken Lineage]

chizow wrote...

Here's the problem I see, there's the same few apologists defending Bioware's design decisions and implying its perfectly acceptable for them to do nothing to modify the game from its original design.  So let me ask of those people:

• 1) Do you think the game is without problems and therefore, wouldn't benefit from any modifications, minor or major?
• 2) If you don't agree with #1, why wouldn't you advocate and lobby for changes from Bioware that would benefit everyone?

We already know for a fact there are numerous bugs and issues clearly not "working as intended", even a few covered in the last 5 pages of replies regarding sustained toggles and mana drain.  There's countless more.  Why wouldn't you expect Bioware to fix these problems along with other issues the vast majority of users see as potential for improvement?  That's great that Bioware has supplied a toolkit for the enterprising modders out there, but I think the overwhelming majority of end-users expect more in the way of support and would much prefer to see fixes that benefit everyone.....

I'm enjoying the game exactly as it is, as are others.  If BioWare wants to release a patch that makes the game more enjoyable for everyone, I am all for it.  Since that is in all likelihood not going to happen, my advice is to be happy with what you've got, contribute to a mod, or play something else that makes you happy.

[F-C]

Haexpane wrote...

It's a problem because the gameplay radically changes when I use a mage's spells.  If you buy a pizza and there is too much sauce on it, would't you tell the pizza maker "Hey, way too much sauce on this" or would you just eat it anyway and pretend there wasn't?

Bioware PATCHES their games, they have since BG2.  The expectation for a balance patch is routine.  Why people are so anti balance is a bit mind boggling.  But my experience tells me is it's because they like exploiting the uber powerful AW build

that same pizza isnt being distributed to some million other people as an exact replica, its a personal order you made for yourself.

this game is a replica being distributed to some million of others.

if you want to make your personalized order then use the toolkit.

[DragoonKain3]

really? show me the dragon age quote it isn't intentional. like I said it's an obvious mechanic just like forcefield. Unless you pull out a quote that they simply overlooked it or its a weird bug then I'm gna go with the much simpler and more realistic explanation in that they intended that mechanic for shimmering shield.

Not a quote, but how about Shimmering Shield turns off in the consoles (both PS3 and 360) when mana runs out, but its only in the PC it does not turn off? When every other sustained ability that drains mana/stamina in all consoles turn off when mana/stamina runs out? All this AW overpowerdness also comes from PC players, so go figure.



Seriously man, use your logic here. You don't need to have a quote when everything else points to it being a bug.

n your sad ass excuse for a "support" mage build you just took every spell that even remotely looked like a support spell and ignored very easy to get very powerful spells....for...absolutely....no....reason.

What very powerful spells are so very easy to get that it always outweighs the talent picks to get it, and this is true for every mage build so every build MUST get this spell? Apart from Cone of Cold/Force Field of course, since I acknowledge those needs to be tweaked as they can turn even reds to a harmless toad just by stacking them.



Can you answer that? No you can't, since you're not a powergamer.



See, the very definition of 'overpowered' or 'broken' is that its so useful to ALL mage builds that even though it might take a bit of sacrifice to get it, all builds of that character MUST have it because its just so goddam game breaking. This only applies to two spells right now... Cone of Cold, and Force Field.



Everything else, there are sacrifices to be made to get said powerful spells. If you can make a mage than can do all the good CCs, all the good AoEs, and all the good Support spells, I'm all ears. Until then, its on you to disprove that Mages can only be go excellent wizards, excellent clerics, something in between, but not excellent at both at once. And so far, all you're doing is making vague notions how this is wrong, but nothing to back up your words.

[Imryll]

chizow wrote...
Anyways, I agree with the OP, I don't think anyone cares mages are imbalanced, they just want to see other classes improved so that there's actual game choices to be made without using the same 2 mages in every playthru, with some flexibility if you choose a mage as your own PC.

My PC has regularly been the only mage in the party, and I've not felt that the warriors and rogues failed to pull their weight. I've only been playing on Normal, though. It may be that it's harder to play the game at higher difficulty levels without multiple mages. But then, isn't the point of playing at higher difficulty levels to make things more challenging?

[Pocketgb]

Unbroken Lineage wrote...

I'm sorry, I missed the game names in your responses.  Could you compile them in a list here again?

His point is that in DA:O, some of those roles are much more valuable than others while quite a few are incredibly lackluster. He's not saying "anything i should come up with should work" (although that would be AWESOME to see in a game like this), rather that there are a few builds/combos that exceed, be it slightly or grealy, ahead of anything else.

Imryll wrote...

chizow wrote...
Anyways, I
agree with the OP, I don't think anyone cares mages are imbalanced,
they just want to see other classes improved so that there's actual
game choices to be made without using the same 2 mages in every
playthru, with some flexibility if you choose a mage as your own
PC.

My PC has regularly been the only mage in the party,
and I've not felt that the warriors and rogues failed to pull their
weight. I've only been playing on Normal, though. It may be that it's
harder to play the game at higher difficulty levels without multiple
mages. But then, isn't the point of playing at higher difficulty levels
to make things more challenging?

Indeed, but I don't see how reducing class effectiveness comes into play D:

Modifié par Pocketgb, 18 novembre 2009 - 09:07 .

[SheffSteel]

Unbroken Lineage wrote...
It's obvious that this game is balanced for 1 Warrior Tank, 1 Single-Target DPS Rogue, 1 AOE DPS/CC Mage, 1 Healer Mage.  History is over-ripe with this formula.  Why this is offensive, I do not know.  

Then let me help.

Number of warriors in balanced party:1    Number of warrior NPCs to choose from: 5 (?)

Number of rogues in balanced party: 1    Number of rogue NPCs to choose from: 2

Number of mages in balanced party: 2    Number of mage NPCs to choose from: 2

Either the game was not intended to be balanced for that party lineup, or the designers overestimated the number of times player would want to play mages, or they forgot about the whole "replay value" concept.

[Pocketgb]

SheffSteel wrote...

Unbroken Lineage wrote...
It's obvious that this game is balanced for 1 Warrior Tank, 1 Single-Target DPS Rogue, 1 AOE DPS/CC Mage, 1 Healer Mage.  History is over-ripe with this formula.  Why this is offensive, I do not know.  

Then let me help.

Number of warriors in balanced party:1    Number of warrior NPCs to choose from: 5 (?)

Number of rogues in balanced party: 1    Number of rogue NPCs to choose from: 2

Number of mages in balanced party: 2    Number of mage NPCs to choose from: 2

Either the game was not intended to be balanced for that party lineup, or the designers overestimated the number of times player would want to play mages, or they forgot about the whole "replay value" concept.

Granted 3 of them are each different roles/set-ups : Dog isn't a true Warrior, Shale isn't a true Warrior, and Alastair is a tank.

But to be honest I'd personally only count those three since Sten and Oghren are stuck with 2H. Poor guys...

[Schyzm]

DragoonKain3 wrote...

really? show me the dragon age quote it isn't intentional. like I said it's an obvious mechanic just like forcefield. Unless you pull out a quote that they simply overlooked it or its a weird bug then I'm gna go with the much simpler and more realistic explanation in that they intended that mechanic for shimmering shield.

Not a quote, but how about Shimmering Shield turns off in the consoles (both PS3 and 360) when mana runs out, but its only in the PC it does not turn off? When every other sustained ability that drains mana/stamina in all consoles turn off when mana/stamina runs out? All this AW overpowerdness also comes from PC players, so go figure.

Seriously man, use your logic here. You don't need to have a quote when everything else points to it being a bug.

n your sad ass excuse for a "support" mage build you just took every spell that even remotely looked like a support spell and ignored very easy to get very powerful spells....for...absolutely....no....reason.

What very powerful spells are so very easy to get that it always outweighs the talent picks to get it, and this is true for every mage build so every build MUST get this spell? Apart from Cone of Cold/Force Field of course, since I acknowledge those needs to be tweaked as they can turn even reds to a harmless toad just by stacking them.

Can you answer that? No you can't, since you're not a powergamer.

See, the very definition of 'overpowered' or 'broken' is that its so useful to ALL mage builds that even though it might take a bit of sacrifice to get it, all builds of that character MUST have it because its just so goddam game breaking. This only applies to two spells right now... Cone of Cold, and Force Field.

Everything else, there are sacrifices to be made to get said powerful spells. If you can make a mage than can do all the good CCs, all the good AoEs, and all the good Support spells, I'm all ears. Until then, its on you to disprove that Mages can only be go excellent wizards, excellent clerics, something in between, but not excellent at both at once. And so far, all you're doing is making vague notions how this is wrong, but nothing to back up your words.

wynn with heal line+spirit healer line is .95 as good as you're ever gna get a healer, and has 12? extra spells or so to pick, thats 3 entire lines.  all I said was among some of the very good spells, like mass paralyze, fireball, waking nightmare, etc I didn't know which was better.  not that I was so ragingly dumb I thought your idiotic "support caster" was actually a good build.  you're trying to say because I admitted to not knowing, among the very good spells which ones are better that I somehow don't know anything about anything.  which is a silly and inane lie.

I've never heard of the discrepancy before.  if it actually does turn off in one and not the other then I guess one is bugged and the other isn't.  but considering the game was bulit for pc and ported for consoles are you really sure its the way you imagine it?  again, you seem to think its bugged just because you consider it an exploit, people have said that about numerous other mage spells, that their mere use is an exploit.  I just don't buy that considering how incredibly terrible the designers would have to be.

[Sevitan7]

Not to derail the topic, but if AlphaMagnum is still around, which line in the ABI_base governs damage? (cooldown and cost seem to be easy enough to find).



Or perhaps, is there anywhere where I can get an explanation of what each column does?