94 réponses à ce sujet

[Shannara13]

AgenTBC wrote...

The OP doesn't understand game design. Mages in the AD&D system were incredibly powerful. But that power was limited by the number of times per day the mage could cast his or her spells. Yeah, a mage in BG2 could press the I WIN button... once. (Or a few times depending on level). The mages in DAO can press the I WIN button over and over and over and over and over and over again. They are not limited in any way because mana restores itself so rapidly between battles and you can just keep chugging the infinite number of mana potions during battles.

In BG2 and such mage power was limited by preventing rest between battles. I would have preferred a lot more no-rest areas, but any limitation was more than we have in DAO.

I soloed all of BG2/TOB as a sorcerer.. on the hardest difficulty... with the Acension patch to make it harder... and it wasn't even a challenge. In fact since I didn't have to worry about Friendly fire it was much easier than doing it with a party.

Modifié par Shannara13, 05 décembre 2009 - 03:03 .

[Sabbatai]

I killed a Dragon in BG2 with "Finger of Death".. haha it was the sleeping one... it's been so long I don't remember name and I may even be thinking of BG1 or NWN...



Anyway..one spell... no fight... dragon dead. I didn't try the spell then quickload to see if I could get the right roll. It just happened by chance.

[Shannara13]

Sabbatai wrote...

I killed a Dragon in BG2 with "Finger of Death".. haha it was the sleeping one... it's been so long I don't remember name and I may even be thinking of BG1 or NWN...

Anyway..one spell... no fight... dragon dead. I didn't try the spell then quickload to see if I could get the right roll. It just happened by chance.

Or you could make a Contingency or Spell Trigger that had 3 Sunfires and watch everything on the map die in one shot.

[Lacan2]

Shannara13 wrote...

Sabbatai wrote...

I killed a Dragon in BG2 with "Finger of Death".. haha it was the sleeping one... it's been so long I don't remember name and I may even be thinking of BG1 or NWN...

Anyway..one spell... no fight... dragon dead. I didn't try the spell then quickload to see if I could get the right roll. It just happened by chance.

Or you could make a Contingency or Spell Trigger that had 3 Sunfires and watch everything on the map die in one shot.

My favorite was Chain Contingency with 3 Horrid Wiltings. Party friendly AOE that kills everything.

But I didn't use it too much, it was boring.

[Kaosgirl]

Skellimancer wrote...

Zealuu wrote...

Yet your precious BGI/II mages couldn't drink a potion during combat to magically re-memorize all the spells they'd already cast and otherwise would have to wait until after the next bout of resting to use again.

yeah, wonderful isn't it? having to plan your spells instead of spamming them and drinking like an alcoholic.

Oh yeah.  It was great when I got wiped because I failed to guess the right set of spells to deal with the next encounter. 

[deathwing200]

AgenTBC wrote...

The OP doesn't understand game design. Mages in the AD&D system were incredibly powerful. But that power was limited by the number of times per day the mage could cast his or her spells. Yeah, a mage in BG2 could press the I WIN button... once. (Or a few times depending on level). The mages in DAO can press the I WIN button over and over and over and over and over and over again. They are not limited in any way because mana restores itself so rapidly between battles and you can just keep chugging the infinite number of mana potions during battles.

In BG2 and such mage power was limited by preventing rest between battles. I would have preferred a lot more no-rest areas, but any limitation was more than we have in DAO.

The mages of BG2 didn't need DA:O's potion mechanics because their spells would 1-2 shot everything on the screen. Dragon's Breath, for example, was a 20d10 attack, which ignored resistance and knocked back. That was in a world where an absolutely maxed out fighter had ~220-250 HP and NPCs had much less. And they could use it with no cooldown with spells per day system. Of course there was also a wish spell, which could replenish your spells, meaning you never needed to rest once you had it.

[Default137]

Go play a Wild Mage in BG1.

BEST THING EVER.

I CAST SHIELD, BUT I SUMMON COW ARMY OF DEEEEEEEATH.

I miss those days

Lets see, list of things that have happened to my Wild Mage, I tried buffing before fighting a Dragon, ended up hitting him with a Finger of Death, which killed them instantly, while walking around town, decided to Identify something, ended up killing the entire town by accident,  oh yeah, and I killed the final boss with a Cow to the head while casting Protection from Magic.

More games need Wild Mage, it was simply the best class ever.

Then again, I accidently killed my own teammates, or even allies at least a good twenty times during the game, because I tried to buff them, and accidently ended up hitting them with Poison Arrow while they were low health or something like that, and since I don't reload in RPGs unless I die, it ended up with some seriously hilarious endings.

Modifié par Default137, 05 décembre 2009 - 03:36 .

[Shannara13]

Seifz wrote...

There's really nothing good about the AD&D spell system.  The DA:O system is much, much better.  Mana is always better than memorization, and spell combos are just a blast to discover and then use.

Actually a major disadvantage of a mana system is that with a mana system you tend to fall back on just repeatably casting your most powerful spell while the lower level spells get ignored. With a memorization system it encourages yout to make the most off all your spells from lvl 1 to max simply because you have only a few uses of your most powerful spells.

[Sabbatai]

Shannara13 wrote...

Seifz wrote...

There's really nothing good about the AD&D spell system.  The DA:O system is much, much better.  Mana is always better than memorization, and spell combos are just a blast to discover and then use.

Actually a major disadvantage of a mana system is that with a mana system you tend to fall back on just repeatably casting your most powerful spell while the lower level spells get ignored. With a memorization system it encourages yout to make the most off all your spells from lvl 1 to max simply because you have only a few uses of your most powerful spells.

Yeah that sounds great but what really would happen would be that you'd just use the weakest spell you could to save your more powerful ones for larger and/or more difficult battles.

DAO encourages strategic thinking imho and I like it.  The mana pots make things a little unfair but if they just increased the aggression spells caused and lowered some of the AW and even the base mage's tanking abilities I think we'd all be a bit happier.

[MerinTB]

Shannara13 wrote...

Seifz wrote...

There's really nothing good about the AD&D spell system.  The DA:O system is much, much better.  Mana is always better than memorization, and spell combos are just a blast to discover and then use.

Actually a major disadvantage of a mana system is that with a mana system you tend to fall back on just repeatably casting your most powerful spell while the lower level spells get ignored. With a memorization system it encourages yout to make the most off all your spells from lvl 1 to max simply because you have only a few uses of your most powerful spells.

And here's where I get flamed -

I think 4th ED has a better solution with the At-Will, Encounter, Daily and Utility Powers and Rituals.  You will be using your At-Wills forever, but not have to "guess" at which spells to prepare and no mana stat to track.

[Kaosgirl]

MerinTB wrote...

Shannara13 wrote...

Seifz wrote...

There's really nothing good about the AD&D spell system.  The DA:O system is much, much better.  Mana is always better than memorization, and spell combos are just a blast to discover and then use.

Actually a major disadvantage of a mana system is that with a mana system you tend to fall back on just repeatably casting your most powerful spell while the lower level spells get ignored. With a memorization system it encourages yout to make the most off all your spells from lvl 1 to max simply because you have only a few uses of your most powerful spells.

And here's where I get flamed -

I think 4th ED has a better solution with the At-Will, Encounter, Daily and Utility Powers and Rituals.  You will be using your At-Wills forever, but not have to "guess" at which spells to prepare and no mana stat to track.

From a tactics and strategy viewpoint, it's a superior system.  But off the computer, there's more to RPGs than just the tactical and strategical elements.  I'd really want to know why my ability to use Encounter spells varies according to whether or not I can count two consecutive opponents as seperate encounters.

[JonDwarf]

At least with DAO your mages actually stand a chance against other mages. Prob with AD&D system you could get a badass mage in storyline but if you forget to build this one spell in conjunction with that other spell and have a low chance to deal serious damage you're getting smacked around like an elf in Demerim. I'd rather feel uber without mathematical formulations to justify my uberness which just makes it feel too much like - *rolls the di* - work

[Tianwyn]

My BG sorceress PC was probably the most uber PC I've ever played, combat-wise. Of course, being able to spam AoE spells in ToB was really helpful.

At least with DAO your mages actually stand a chance against other mages. Prob with AD&D system you could get a badass mage in storyline but if you forget to build this one spell in conjunction with that other spell and have a low chance to deal serious damage you're getting smacked around like an elf in Demerim.

Improvisation time! Seriously, that was one of the fun things about combat in BG2, IMO. And with such a potentially diverse 6-person team, you could get relatively creative.



Not that I'm dissing DA's magic system, but I really enjoyed the variety of spells available in BG.

[Tomark]

While there are some very strong spells in BG2 that are lacking in DA:O (though i don't think they should be there), i don't really see there being more 'diversity' in BG.



Pretty much the only kind of spell that is absent in DA:O would be invisibility, but i think it's a conscious decision.



Above, someone talked about all the protection spells in BG against other spells- there are some too in DA:O.



And i like the fusion of spells (though there should be more).

[deathwing200]

Tomark wrote...

While there are some very strong spells in BG2 that are lacking in DA:O (though i don't think they should be there), i don't really see there being more 'diversity' in BG.

Pretty much the only kind of spell that is absent in DA:O would be invisibility, but i think it's a conscious decision.

Above, someone talked about all the protection spells in BG against other spells- there are some too in DA:O.

And i like the fusion of spells (though there should be more).

Can't really compare spells that made you completely immune to all weapons to spells that give a minor armor boost. In BG2, I actually tanked with a mage because his survivability was 10 times higher than warrior.

[MerinTB]

Kaosgirl wrote...

MerinTB wrote...

Shannara13 wrote...

Seifz wrote...

There's really nothing good about the AD&D spell system.  The DA:O system is much, much better.  Mana is always better than memorization, and spell combos are just a blast to discover and then use.

Actually a major disadvantage of a mana system is that with a mana system you tend to fall back on just repeatably casting your most powerful spell while the lower level spells get ignored. With a memorization system it encourages yout to make the most off all your spells from lvl 1 to max simply because you have only a few uses of your most powerful spells.

And here's where I get flamed -

I think 4th ED has a better solution with the At-Will, Encounter, Daily and Utility Powers and Rituals.  You will be using your At-Wills forever, but not have to "guess" at which spells to prepare and no mana stat to track.

From a tactics and strategy viewpoint, it's a superior system.  But off the computer, there's more to RPGs than just the tactical and strategical elements.  I'd really want to know why my ability to use Encounter spells varies according to whether or not I can count two consecutive opponents as seperate encounters.

After an encounter ends you take a Short Rest, five minutes to catch your breath, patch your wounds, regain your stamina.  It is after a Short Rest that you regain your Encounter powers (i.e. the rest and energy needed to pull off more tiring / draining manuevers / spells.)

At the end of a trying day (or if you just really exhausted yourself / was beaten bloody in a fight and need real recovery time) you take an Extended Rest - I think it's 6 hours of rest, but it could be 8, that if you aren't sleeping you are at least engaged in no stenuous activity.  After a night's sleep (or similar resting) you are recouperated to try and pull off those extremely exhausting / energy-depleting actions / incantations - your Daily powers.

Honestly, it makes more sense to me than having 3 Magic Missiles memorized in your mind somehow.

[lockerlocke]

The resting system hardly mattered by the end, though. Almost everything would die before you ran out of spells, and if not, you always had Wish to rest you back up.



Overpowered mages in DA are a direct consequence of people flocking to the most powerful spells... some should give things like Grease a chance.

[Roxlimn]

You cannot make the argument that Mages in DAO are overpowered based on infinite lyrium potions, because by that same argument, a Warrior could have infinite health poultices, and unlike a Mage with infinite lyrium potions, a Warrior with infinite Health Poultices actually can eventually finish DAO without your doing anything other than conversation choices.

[DaeFaron]

JonDwarf wrote...
I'd rather feel uber without mathematical formulations to justify my uberness which just makes it feel too much like - *rolls the di* - work

This is the reason I never touched a mage in Neverwinter Nights. Me and one of my brothers had a level 20 sorcerer duel, pretty much the exact same setup spell-wise I believe. But he knew the stats to modify his spells better and always destroyed me.

The amount of numbers can get confusing if you don't really care to min-max. (Increasing your intelligence will up your fireballs damage by 5d7, while a high wisdom modifier will help your spell penetration by 2d6.) Stuff like that.

[buzerunn]

Mages are powerful due to their AoE spells, which usually have a long cool down.

IMO they aren't overpowered EXCEPT for the few bull**** spells such as BLOOD WOUND and CONE OF ICE.

Mana clash is kinda overpowered too. My mage can basically kill 90% of other mages in the game with one shot....it also works on shades and some darkspawns btw.

Modifié par buzerunn, 05 décembre 2009 - 06:25 .

[Sidney]

The biggest difference in DOA vs BG2 that make mages strong are:



1. Don't have to work off a list of memorized spells with limited daily uses.

2. Fewer saving throws. I can toss stuff like Crushing Prison on big time foes and, gasp, it worked unlike say Disintegrate in BG2 which did nothing on anything I wanted to disintegrate. Same thing with spells like sleep or horror which seem to "connect" a lot more than those same spells in BG2

3. Mages don't have counter magic (and this BTW is a good thing). I hated that the main role for my mages as BG@ worse on were casting 10 different varieties of debuffs to strip away the isane protections fired off by sequencers to nerf mage fights. In DAO my mages main role is to kill people and break things.

[satang]

D&D wizard in summary.

[Leather_Rebel90]

For starters, anyone who argues that mages ARN'T overpowered in Dragon Age is clearly either trolling or just causing trouble. It's blatantly obvious that they are. And yes, I do play a Mage. However, they are not NEARLY as overpowered as they are in Baldur's Gate 2. If I have to hear Minsc say "No Effect?!" one more time I'm going to break my monitor. Seriously, it was ridiculous. Fighting a Mage in BG2 as a Primarily Melee Based Party was basically a war of attrition. Just try to out-live his frickin shield which seems to last FOR-EV-AR.

[SomeoneStoleMyName]

purplesunset wrote...

Dragon Age was intended to be a low-magic game, and even the lore supports this "low-magic"  goal.

I hope you mean only DA:O and not any sequels and the like, low magic worlds sucks. The game was great but just a shadow of what it couldve been as a high magic world.

[Kaosgirl]

MerinTB wrote...

Kaosgirl wrote...

MerinTB wrote...

Shannara13 wrote...

Seifz wrote...

There's really nothing good about the AD&D spell system.  The DA:O system is much, much better.  Mana is always better than memorization, and spell combos are just a blast to discover and then use.

Actually a major disadvantage of a mana system is that with a mana system you tend to fall back on just repeatably casting your most powerful spell while the lower level spells get ignored. With a memorization system it encourages yout to make the most off all your spells from lvl 1 to max simply because you have only a few uses of your most powerful spells.

And here's where I get flamed -

I think 4th ED has a better solution with the At-Will, Encounter, Daily and Utility Powers and Rituals.  You will be using your At-Wills forever, but not have to "guess" at which spells to prepare and no mana stat to track.

From a tactics and strategy viewpoint, it's a superior system.  But off the computer, there's more to RPGs than just the tactical and strategical elements.  I'd really want to know why my ability to use Encounter spells varies according to whether or not I can count two consecutive opponents as seperate encounters.

After an encounter ends you take a Short Rest, five minutes to catch your breath, patch your wounds, regain your stamina.  It is after a Short Rest that you regain your Encounter powers (i.e. the rest and energy needed to pull off more tiring / draining manuevers / spells.)

I duck under cover and take a five minute breather while the rest of my party distracts the enemy.  Does that let me recover my Encounter powers?  By the justification, it should; but I'm guessing 'by the book' it would not.

MerinTB wrote...
Honestly, it makes more sense to me than having 3 Magic Missiles memorized in your mind somehow.

We never did do spell memorization.  We did spell preparation - a slight semantical difference maybe, but it made more sense

Though apart from the 'incomplete' magic system, I found myself leaning towards the Iron Heroes alternative instead.