135 réponses à ce sujet

[Abraham_uk]

I realise that I may not be the best person to discuss this.

So according to you, how do you feel mages should be balanced?
What shouldn't be done to balance mages?
What should the mage's strength in relation to other classes be?



Edit: The opening post and title was just plain wrong.
It was offensive and didn't stand up to any scrunity.

I made these changes since there is an interesting discussion on this thread inspite of these faux pas. I didn't want the moderators shutting the thread down.

Modifié par Abraham_uk, 21 septembre 2013 - 10:17 .

[Abraham_uk]

Voided as result of negative feedback.

Modifié par Abraham_uk, 21 septembre 2013 - 10:15 .

[agonis]

I aktually liked my overpowered mage Hawke in DA2. I loved casting an area spell and watching them burn. I even forgot to choose the next spell sometimes because it was quite a show.
(Now that sounded a bit psychophatic...)

But I have to admit that I changed the game settings to "casual" somewhere in the game because the endless and pointless waves of enemies annoyed me so.
I don´t know how strong a mage is on a "hard" or "nightmare" difficulty. On "casual" a mage is a wapon of mass destruction.

[TheKomandorShepard]

i think that you want alex mercer as mage protagonist xD

[In Exile]

Spell variety sucks, because most spells suck. That's not really a way to nerf mages, it's just that for most games, if you're not dealing damage you're wasting your time.

Otherwise, I disagree with you on the glass cannon and melee. If you give mages melee and make them durable, then you have to nerf their damage. Otherwise, you just have the super Mary Sue class that can do anything, and then what's the point of the other classes?

[Palidane]

So, you want mages to have a variety of powerful spells with different effects with no serious downside, as well as being reasonably tough and able to contribute in melee.

Seriously? That's your idea of balance?

[Navasha]

I think the best way to balance mages would be to force them to specialize early on. Instead of just the broad "mage" class, there should be enchanters, elementalists, sorcerors, hedge wizards, druids, healers, etc..

Each would have their own fully fledged talent trees. The problem with mages in most games is they try to throw it all together under one single classification. Make them unique classes with all different magical talents that don't (or even can't) overlap.

Of course, this is never done because of the sheer amount of resources that would be needed. But it would be awesome and fix a lot of the balance issues games have with mages. They could have their really powerful spells, but they are still going to be limited quite a bit because their magic can't do everything.

[Abraham_uk]

Voided as a result of negative feedback.

Modifié par Abraham_uk, 21 septembre 2013 - 10:13 .

[Abraham_uk]

Voided as a result of negative feedback.

Modifié par Abraham_uk, 21 septembre 2013 - 10:13 .

[Abraham_uk]

Voided as a result of negative feedback.

Modifié par Abraham_uk, 21 septembre 2013 - 10:14 .

[iOnlySignIn]

Why should Mages be balanced?

(1) They are OP by lore and

(2) This is mostly a single player game and MP is most likely to be coop

It's like asking Infiltrators to be balanced in Mass Effect 3. Can't, and shouldn't.

Modifié par iOnlySignIn, 21 septembre 2013 - 09:48 .

[In Exile]

Abraham_uk wrote...
Okay think about it this way

Warrior has 10 hit points
Rogue has 5 hit points
Mage has 1 hit point

That's now even close to how it works. In DA:O and DA2, mages started with HP give or take around what warriors had, and the only difference between them and rogues was (i) dodging and (ii) armour. 

So I don't follow your complaint, because it doesn't describe the game at all.

Melee being an option would be nice as long as the mage cannot be as powerful as the warrior and rogue. 

What would be the point of having an inferior ability that you should never use?

[Thresh the Qunari]

aren't they supose to be op? if there as dangerous as a warrior or rogue then why fear them?

[Fast Jimmy]

I've suggested a system in the past where low level skills (the Heal and Fireballs of the DA world) all work normally, but the more uber-spells (such as Storm of the Century or Firestorm) do amazing, powerful damage (even moreso than what was in the previous DA games), but costs lyrium to cast.

And when I say lyrium, I don't mean "it costs a lot of mana and you need to chug lyrium potions a lot" I mean actual, processed lyrium. The kind that everyone in the game says Mages need to cast their most powerful spells, but which, for some reason, no character in the game needs at all unless there is a plot reason for it.

This would tie a gold/resource management component to the Mage class, where spamming your most powerful spells is a possible, but expensive, avenue.


In turn, this could make Blood Magic much more utilitarian (and tempting), as it WOULD allow you to spam said skills for free ( with the trade off of health, of course). If the game was coupled with a very intriguing mechanic/reactivity to the choice of using blood magic, this would make for QUITE the interesting dilemma for players.

[Abraham_uk]

I've changed my opening post and voided my subsequent posts as they didn't stand up to any scrutiny.

So. How should mages be balanced in your opinion? If at all...

Modifié par Abraham_uk, 21 septembre 2013 - 10:15 .

[In Exile]

Fast Jimmy wrote...
In turn, this could make Blood Magic much more utilitarian (and tempting), as it WOULD allow you to spam said skills for free ( with the trade off of health, of course). If the game was coupled with a very intriguing mechanic/reactivity to the choice of using blood magic, this would make for QUITE the interesting dilemma for players.

Maybe some players. I'd see absolutely no downside to it, unless the game did that thing where it was unreasonably punishing to troll players. 

[Abraham_uk]

How about wizard foes?

Should wizard foes follow the same rules of magic as your party?
Or is it okay for them to spam area of effect spells whilst the same being impossible for the party?

Also should enemy wizards also get the same variety of spells as wizards in your party?

Modifié par Abraham_uk, 21 septembre 2013 - 10:22 .

[In Exile]

Abraham_uk wrote...

How about wizard foes?

Should wizard foes follow the same rules of magic as your party?
Or is it okay for them to spam area of effect spells whilst the same being impossible for the party?

I hate it when enemies don't follow the same rules as the player. I hate it a lot. 

[Abraham_uk]

In Exile wrote...

Abraham_uk wrote...

How about wizard foes?

Should wizard foes follow the same rules of magic as your party?
Or is it okay for them to spam area of effect spells whilst the same being impossible for the party?

I hate it when enemies don't follow the same rules as the player. I hate it a lot. 

Finally. We agree on something:wizard:.

I was also wondering on frequency of wizards appearing.
I like the idea of enemy wizards being few.

A few really challenging foes. Perhaps making them the most punishingly difficult enemies in the game to showcase how powerful magic is. I would like wizards to be rare are in said universe. If wizards are all over the place then magic doesn't seem all that impressive.

Modifié par Abraham_uk, 21 septembre 2013 - 10:28 .

[katamuro]

Generally mages should be able to dispense a lot of damage but in close combat they would not be able to go toe to toe with the warriors.

[Br3admax]

/Implying that prodigal mage PC that is praised for talent and skill is the same as every other mage in existence.

Very bad assumption OP.

[Abraham_uk]

Br3ad wrote...

/Implying that prodigal mage PC that is praised for talent and skill is the same as every other mage in existence.

Very bad assumption OP.

Not so much praised.
Rather feared and hated.
The kind of person that Templars would quickly have locked up or executed.

All this talk about mages versus Templars. Why are so many mages locked up, but when it comes to player character and followers, they turn a blind eye (Bethany Hawke being an exception).

Modifié par Abraham_uk, 21 septembre 2013 - 10:33 .

[mickey111]

Balanced tactically as an all around troll who ruins the enemies best laid plans. I liked it when I saw the use of that ice wall spell in one of the most recent game demonstrations. Not to say that he shouldn't get destructive and big explosive magic, but I've always liked to have that guy around who beats enemies indirectly and by helping friends surpass their potential. Can do these things by making his pals stronger and faster, by summoning minions, reanimating fallen enemies, healing his pals, telekenises and the aforementioned ice wall magic. I can make this brainstormining list of examples longer, but I'm sure I've said enough to articulate my idea of my mage style. Fireballs and big numbers are one thing, and definetly the first thing people think of whenever they read the word "magic", and it is a good addition, but I find that magic needs more than explosions and expanding numbers or else it's just not quite magical enough and that's just disappointing.

Modifié par mickey111, 21 septembre 2013 - 10:49 .

[AlanC9]

In Exile wrote...

Melee being an option would be nice as long as the mage cannot be as powerful as the warrior and rogue. 

What would be the point of having an inferior ability that you should never use?

Conserving mana?

[Red Panda]

katamuro wrote...

Generally mages should be able to dispense a lot of damage but in close combat they would not be able to go toe to toe with the warriors.

Magic is not reason for fraility.