152 réponses à ce sujet

[Skellimancer]

addiction21 wrote...

Skellimancer wrote...

I am at the Mage Tower using Mana Clash spell which is an AOE that 1 shots any opponent with mana on Nightmare difficulty.

Yes, mages are not overpowered. LOL.

Hey did you ever get a chance to do that thing I suggested doing? If so post pics and a police report please

I really can not find anything to argue about your statement other then "oh god a spell ment to rape mages actualy works? boooo hiss boooo"
Also the mages being powerfull thing... ya I see it. Hell I do not even need all the nifty little comobs others have mentioned. Just give me fireball and that tends to trivilize most every combat that involves more the one enemy

Awww c'mon even templars don't get an ability that powerful vs mages.

You really are defending it?

[addiction21]

Not really defending it per say. More of a devils advocate. Which is something hard to do with this subject since mages imho are ridiculously powerfull in what they can do and accomplished compared to the other class's.

[Terwox_]

Just for the record. Overpowered means more powerful than intended. At least in this context. And quite frankly I don't think Bioware unintentionally made them as powerful as they are. However, as has been pointed out by previous posters. The AI could use a tune up. Maybe add a little extra to the rogue's and warriors. And considering that the number off spells available is far greater than the number off spell/talent points available in any give game. I really don't see the problem.



So in short, I don't see what all this useless fuss is about.

[-Solrek-]

I understand the idea that mages should be overpowered as a lore concept, but it does not have to be that way. Great power could be limited to a select few, and only at higher levels with many years of study and training under the belt.



As for gameplay design, why make one class more diverse and capable than all other classes combined?

[Hug-A-Tree]

Schyzm wrote...

Joe Ronimo wrote...

Raise your hand if the lack of class balance in BG2 ruined that game for you.

bg2's class balance was actual far superior to dragon age's(afterall it was largely dnd).  it had its exploits but they were hidden way at the end in non-obvious builds that often involved a lot of pre-planning.  on the other hand, as many have attested to here dragon age becomes a joke if you stumble across a few gamebreaking spells by complete accident.  I believe you can have forcefield at lvl 2 for instance.  hardly an endgame attribute.

waait.. so balance is only superficially important? as long as it is aparently balanced it is good enough... if we hide the unbalanced stuff away? 

By that logic to me DA is very balanced since it is OBVIOUS that morrigan would shapeshift in combat and OBVIOUS that wynne would never get into primal whatever damage dealing magic. tis completely hidden to me that mages are overpowered  and so on and so forth.

[cembandit]

You do realize that the main religion in the game is about the awesome power of mages and the need to keep it in check?

[Brunopolis]

I remember getting frustrated and thinking the game was impossible because I didn't have Morrigan in my group and I did the circle quest last so I didn't have Wynn. I had to lower the game difficulty to easy to be able to get through it. Then when I eventually started using Morrigan I realized how much easier the game became.



Seriously, how can anyone defend the balance of mages? I thought the game was impossible until I realized how broken mages are. What happens with more casual gamers that don't consider the possibility that mages are broken. Do they just give up?

[JaegerBane]

-Solrek- wrote...

I understand the idea that mages should be overpowered as a lore concept, but it does not have to be that way. Great power could be limited to a select few, and only at higher levels with many years of study and training under the belt.

Right. So mages are only supposed to be powerful when discussing lore. Outside of lore they need to be toned down.

I can't help but chuckle at some of the anti-magery on this board. It's almost as if the chantry's dogma has somehow leaked out of the game into reality.

Mages are *supposed* to be powerful. Particularly in this game, where they're treated as if they're monsters. That's kind of the point behind them. In RPGs mages are supposed to be the nukers, the crowd controllers, the damagers. Warriors are supposed to be the tanks and rogues are supposed to be the skill monkeys. That's how the thee-class archetype works. I mean, you have a mage that can summon a lightning storm down on his enemies. What do you actually expect a warrior with a sword to be able to do to be able to match up to the AOE damage of that?

The mage has always been the class that, relative to others, starts out weak and useless and gains proportionately more power as they increase in skill than the other classes do. It's the choice you make - a linear progression of power for warrior/rogue, or an exponential increase with higher max and lower min for mage.

As for gameplay design, why make one class more diverse and capable than all other classes combined?

Because that one class starts out as a weakling compared to the other two. He can't fight, he can't open locks or sneak attack, and he can't even cast that many spells.

If you honestly feel that the mage is more diverse and capable, that's normally an indication that you should be playing a mage.

Join us.

[FlatCat]

People keep misinterpreting the lore.  Mages have many of the disadvantages of Warhammer magic users in the lore without that level of power.  They're not dangerous because of strength, they are dangerous because they are gateways to the forces of Chaos...whoops I mean the Fade.  And has been said you don't experience the disadvantages of the lore either.  You can chug lyrium potions all day long without your colon eroding away, you won't mutate and sprout dongs from your ears from overcasting, you can be a blood mage and not have every Fereldan dirt farmer with a torch and pitchfork (no polearms remember!) screaming and gibbering at you, etc.

[-Solrek-]

Mages are the best tanks (Arcane), crowd control (Spirit/Entropy), and DPSers (Primal), simple as that.

[Seraphael]

-Solrek- wrote...

Mages are the best tanks (Arcane), crowd control (Spirit/Entropy), and DPSers (Primal), simple as that.

Never at the same time though. Arcane Warriors sacrifice spellcasting for survivability. Survivability is but one aspect of tanking, aggro management is equally important. Also, Rogues and Warriors are able to obtain better single target damage and can get more skills and/or survivability coupled with aggro management. So no, not as simple as that.

Modifié par Seraphael, 22 novembre 2009 - 05:16 .

[JaegerBane]

-Solrek- wrote...

Mages are the best tanks (Arcane), crowd control (Spirit/Entropy), and DPSers (Primal), simple as that.

...
at the end. At the start of the game they're the worst at all 3 and
can't fight or break locks to save their lives. They eventually get to
the pinnacle, but that's the point. And even when they get there, they don't have the number of spells to be best at all 3.

I mean, turn this the other way. What would be the point in having the whole circle of magi, all the Templar security, all that training, just to produce a guy that can destroy enemies like a warrior can, he just doesn't need a sword to it?

If you want an answer to that question, look at Mask of the Betrayer.

FlatCat wrote...

People keep misinterpreting the lore.  Mages have many of the disadvantages of Warhammer magic users in the lore without that level of power.  They're not dangerous because of strength, they are dangerous because they are gateways to the forces of Chaos...whoops I mean the Fade.  And has been said you don't experience the disadvantages of the lore either.  You can chug lyrium potions all day long without your colon eroding away, you won't mutate and sprout dongs from your ears from overcasting, you can be a blood mage and not have every Fereldan dirt farmer with a torch and pitchfork (no polearms remember!) screaming and gibbering at you, etc.

I think you're the one misinterpreting it. The potential possesion by demons is a caveat of being a mage, it isn't the reason for all the fear. Look at Daveth's reaction when you met Morrigan. Do you same him going 'Oh no! It's a witch! There's a chance that she might get possesed and then she might kill me!'?.

No. He's scared because he think she might turn him into a frog.

*Magic* is the reason why mages are feared. The whole demon thing is just an extra concern.

To be brutally honest, the way magic is depicted in DA:O has far more in common with Psychics in Warhammer 40k than it does with magic in Warhammer. In 40k, human Psykers have to be registered. The only legal ones are taken from their families, tested, and depending on their power, either executed, trained, or used as a resource. Rogues are hunted down by an order of warriors trained to deal with Psykers. And Psykers are the primary - some would say, only - way Daemons can arrive from the warp. But even given all this, human psykers - like the Inquisition, or the Space MArine Librarians - are not feared because of their chance of possession. They're feared because they can scatter whole squads and char them to a crisp.

Does that sound familiar?

Modifié par JaegerBane, 22 novembre 2009 - 05:20 .

[FlatCat]

Unless it has been retconned away Warhammer IS Warhammer 40k the setting of warhammer is on a planet with a medieval tech level (no shortage of those in that screwed up universe) elves and dwarves are just mutated humans and so on and psyker is just the term for their warlocks.

The witch of the wilds are not TRUE mages and are more closely associated with abominations.  You can't do what Flemeth does later after all.  If you could shapeshifting wouldn't be so nerfed. In any case that's mostly an aside for humor it doesn't really reflect what mages can do in the setting.  Fear and prejudice don't represent reality that applies in real life as well.

[JaegerBane]

FlatCat wrote...

Unless it has been retconned away Warhammer IS Warhammer 40k the setting of warhammer is on a planet with a medieval tech level (no shortage of those in that screwed up universe) elves and dwarves are just mutated humans and so on and psyker is just the term for their warlocks.

This is both beside the point if it were true, and wrong regardless. WH40k does have some similarities - it has races that to a certain extent, resemble races in Warhammer (and I do mean to an extent - Dwarves in 40k are an extinct branch of humanity called Squats, ELdar are effectively high elves but bear far more in common with Vulcans from star trek and Minbari from Babylon 5), and Necrons - ancient, hyper-advanced killing machines - bear some resemblance to Tomb Kings but just as much to The Terminator). But the way magic and psychics are handled are completely different. There was a rumour that Sigmar was a primarch from 40k but that was never confirmed.

But regardless, magic and psychics are different. And the way DA:O handles them is much closer to psychics.

The witch of the wilds are not TRUE mages and are more closely associated with abominations.  You can't do what Flemeth does later after all.  If you could shapeshifting wouldn't be so nerfed. In any case that's mostly an aside for humor it doesn't really reflect what mages can do in the setting.  Fear and prejudice don't represent reality that applies in real life as well.

This is completely irrelevant. The guy isn't worried about the fact that Morrigan isn't a 'true mage', for crying out loud. He voices his worries pretty clearly.

Modifié par JaegerBane, 22 novembre 2009 - 05:52 .

[Schyzm]

Hug-A-Tree wrote...

Schyzm wrote...

Joe Ronimo wrote...

Raise your hand if the lack of class balance in BG2 ruined that game for you.

bg2's class balance was actual far superior to dragon age's(afterall it was largely dnd).  it had its exploits but they were hidden way at the end in non-obvious builds that often involved a lot of pre-planning.  on the other hand, as many have attested to here dragon age becomes a joke if you stumble across a few gamebreaking spells by complete accident.  I believe you can have forcefield at lvl 2 for instance.  hardly an endgame attribute.

waait.. so balance is only superficially important? as long as it is aparently balanced it is good enough... if we hide the unbalanced stuff away? 

By that logic to me DA is very balanced since it is OBVIOUS that morrigan would shapeshift in combat and OBVIOUS that wynne would never get into primal whatever damage dealing magic. tis completely hidden to me that mages are overpowered  and so on and so forth.

except the first time you shapeshift you realize its awful and stop completely.  and wynne starts with 3 spells in primal so I dont even know wtf you're talking about there.

bg2's setup isn't ideal.  it is better though. 

[Schyzm]

FlatCat wrote...

People keep misinterpreting the lore.  Mages have many of the disadvantages of Warhammer magic users in the lore without that level of power.  They're not dangerous because of strength, they are dangerous because they are gateways to the forces of Chaos...whoops I mean the Fade.  And has been said you don't experience the disadvantages of the lore either.  You can chug lyrium potions all day long without your colon eroding away, you won't mutate and sprout dongs from your ears from overcasting, you can be a blood mage and not have every Fereldan dirt farmer with a torch and pitchfork (no polearms remember!) screaming and gibbering at you, etc.

lore only counts when it helps their flacid arguments gull darnit!

[Raxxman]

 

FlatCat wrote...

Unless it has been retconned away Warhammer IS Warhammer 40k the setting of warhammer is on a planet with a medieval tech level (no shortage of those in that screwed up universe) elves and dwarves are just mutated humans and so on and psyker is just the term for their warlocks.

Well I guess Games Workshop categorically denying that this is not the case numerous times isn't enough for you? GW have always said WH and WH40K are the same story (Order vs Chaos) told in different settings, and are NOT interconnected.

The witch of the wilds are not TRUE mages and are more closely associated with abominations.  You can't do what Flemeth does later after all.  If you could shapeshifting wouldn't be so nerfed. In any case that's mostly an aside for humor it doesn't really reflect what mages can do in the setting.  Fear and prejudice don't represent reality that applies in real life as well.

What part of casting magic makes them not mages?

Anyhow, mages have always been powerful in games and fiction, but more often than not they're killed by a plucky swordsman. One of the fundamental issues with game design is lack of negative issues with supposedly dangerous magic. A lot of the older pnp games had serious repercussions when casting high level spells.

Take 2nd ed D&D vs 3rd ed. A lot of high level spells in 2nd ed had serious drawbacks, like taking 10 years off your life. In 3rd ed all those negatives were removed which made the game significantly easier for magic users.

Anyone play middle earth roleplaying? a mage could blow his hand up by just casting a simple light spell.

DA:O has just followed up on this lazy trend. With no negatives to magic, magic itself becomes mundane.

[FlatCat]

Raxxman wrote...



Well I guess Games Workshop categorically denying that this is not the case numerous times isn't enough for you? GW have always said WH and WH40K are the same story (Order vs Chaos) told in different settings, and are NOT interconnected.

To be quite honest no it isn't enough.  GW is probably one of the most glaring examples of an author being more wrong about their work than anybody else.  Some hobo on the street is more in tune with Warhammer than the entirety of Games Workshop. 

What part of casting magic makes them not mages?

Anyhow, mages have always been powerful in games and fiction, but more often than not they're killed by a plucky swordsman. One of the fundamental issues with game design is lack of negative issues with supposedly dangerous magic. A lot of the older pnp games had serious repercussions when casting high level spells.

Take 2nd ed D&D vs 3rd ed. A lot of high level spells in 2nd ed had serious drawbacks, like taking 10 years off your life. In 3rd ed all those negatives were removed which made the game significantly easier for magic users.

Anyone play middle earth roleplaying? a mage could blow his hand up by just casting a simple light spell.

DA:O has just followed up on this lazy trend. With no negatives to magic, magic itself becomes mundane.

They are not "mages" in the sense that the demons and other magic using creatures aren't mages.  They don't represent the "typical" mage that lights up the Chantry fires and so on.  The whole lore all revolves around the potential of evil and sin of man and all that crap.  The Tevinter mages blood magic was feared for it's insidious influence over people and their summoning of demons.  They still used conventional armies they didn't waltz up and magi nuked everything on their lonesome.

The problem with those old school ridiculous Gygaxian lunancy magic balance was that iterative probability would kill your rear end in a few adventures.  In video games this is surmounted by patience and Power Word Reload.

Modifié par FlatCat, 22 novembre 2009 - 08:21 .

[daemon1129]

Seriously guys, Mages are suppose to be really powerful lore wise or game-play wise. Mages' roles are either hight burst damage or crowd control, warriors tanks, rouges are to flank and disarray enemy groups. I mean come on, Morrigan pretty much killed the High dragon with a single lightning spell...

There are no overpower in a single player game, like someone have mentioned, especially its a RPG. You are role playing the Grey Wardens who are heroes that defeated the blight, and other great stuff, and how would it sound if they got killed by some silly walking corpse or wolfs, or even dark spawns. The only thing that could threaten the Grey Wardens should be the final boss, lore wise and game play wise. If you find this single player RPG is too easy, play hardcore or download the hardcore mod. If you still find it too easy and don't seem to enjoy role playing, please move on and play something else.

[0mar]

Whenever you camp, you should have a chance to get possessed by a demon and your game ends right then. It's supported by the lore.

[Skellimancer]

daemon1129 wrote...

Seriously guys, Mages are suppose to be really powerful lore wise or game-play wise.

Bioware took the lazy way out with balance.

Biodev1 "How the hell do we balance all this stuff?"
Biodev2 "LOL, why bother? just say Mages are the Pwners in the lore, dude!"
Biodev1 "hell yeah!"

[Wardawg1001]

Skellimancer wrote...

daemon1129 wrote...

Seriously guys, Mages are suppose to be really powerful lore wise or game-play wise.

Bioware took the lazy way out with balance.

Biodev1 "How the hell do we balance all this stuff?"
Biodev2 "LOL, why bother? just say Mages are the Pwners in the lore, dude!"
Biodev1 "hell yeah!"

Yea you are totally right. Everything about this game screams that they went in and created 3 classes and decided to balance them out entirely then build the story around these classes. Except after making the decision to create 3 classes and balance them before designing the story or lore or any other part of the game, they suddenly decided that they dont know how to balance or dont care to balance the classes, and thus we have our current incarnation of the game. HOW OBVIOUS!

Think before you speak please.

[menasure]

Skellimancer wrote...

daemon1129 wrote...

Seriously guys, Mages are suppose to be really powerful lore wise or game-play wise.

Bioware took the lazy way out with balance.

Biodev1 "How the hell do we balance all this stuff?"
Biodev2 "LOL, why bother? just say Mages are the Pwners in the lore, dude!"
Biodev1 "hell yeah!"

my fighters eat them for breakfast while they have a whole lot more trouble with high skilled archers ... should tell you something.

[Skellimancer]

menasure wrote...

Skellimancer wrote...

daemon1129 wrote...

Seriously guys, Mages are suppose to be really powerful lore wise or game-play wise.

Bioware took the lazy way out with balance.

Biodev1 "How the hell do we balance all this stuff?"
Biodev2 "LOL, why bother? just say Mages are the Pwners in the lore, dude!"
Biodev1 "hell yeah!"

my fighters eat them for breakfast while they have a whole lot more trouble with high skilled archers ... should tell you something.

Mana clash much?

[menasure]

Skellimancer wrote...

menasure wrote...

Skellimancer wrote...

daemon1129 wrote...

Seriously guys, Mages are suppose to be really powerful lore wise or game-play wise.

Bioware took the lazy way out with balance.

Biodev1 "How the hell do we balance all this stuff?"
Biodev2 "LOL, why bother? just say Mages are the Pwners in the lore, dude!"
Biodev1 "hell yeah!"

my fighters eat them for breakfast while they have a whole lot more trouble with high skilled archers ... should tell you something.

Mana clash much?

nope i have only read about that one on the forum