113 réponses à ce sujet

[Adhin]

yeah I can see staff basic attacks going against ranged defense. Probably a buncha monster magic like auto-attacks will count too. Still not 100% sure about the whole Magic Defense stat. Could be same as old Magic Resist and they changed its name to defense to make it less confusing. Either way I think they're all rather good, but wont ever be a deciding factor for the character I'm making.

[azarhal]

I remember hearing some time ago that the elven bonus defends against basic ranged magic projectiles (like staff attacks), but has no effect on AoE attacks or dragons' breath.  Just how common such projectiles will be in the game remains to be seen...

 

Dragon's breath is not a projectile, but some of them have attacks that are projectiles. There is a gif of Cassandra around that show her reflecting a dragon's ice ball with a shield.

[Icy Magebane]

Dragon's breath is not a projectile, but some of them have attacks that are projectiles. There is a gif of Cassandra around that show her reflecting a dragon's ice ball with a shield.

Yeah, that's true.  The elven passive most likely protects against that, but I will not be taking any chances since it probably deals a ton of damage if it hits.  xD  When I see that headed my way, I'll Fade Cloak, Reflect, Dodge, etc... no way am I going to rely on a passive with a % chance to kick in.  Assuming that's how it works.  Blocking a small % of damage doesn't sound like a good option either... this type of ability seems better suited to unavoidable or difficult to dodge attacks from multiple ranged enemies, not as a primary defensive option against a single, high-damage projectile.

[Alodar]

You mean as like - in almost any RPG, ever? There are always some abilities/spells/etc that are rendered (temporarily) meaningless, because current enemy is immune or resistant to them. For example if you have to fight some fire elementals then every fire spell you have, is meaningless in that particular fight.

And when I came across an enemy that wasn't affected by certain spells I used my other spells that I had chosen at level up -- that is why I chose those other spells. In DAI if you encounter an enemy who is unaffected by the spells on your hotbar you don't have that option.
 

So you have to plan ahead - big deal. It's still better (or more "friendly") than AD&D system where you had to plan your spells much more ahead, because you had to sleep to memorize them and you had only limited spell slots (depending on your level/inteligence etc).

So that is your standard?
This 2014 video game's spell system is better than a Paper and Pen game system released 37 years ago?

At least the vancian magic system D&D used had an in game justification. You weren't memorizing spells you were writing them on your brain just like you would write them on a scroll. Your brain could only hold so much depending on your level and intelligence and when you cast those spells they were gone from your brain just like they would disappear from a scroll.

DAI's 8 active ability per combat limit has no in-game justification.
 

So you will just scout ahead and then plan your 8 active skills/spells according to possible dangers that you may encounter (or tactics you will want to use).

How do you plan on scouting out what monsters are going to pour out of a rift?
 

And be honest - how often did you use more than 8 different spells in one encounter?

It's not about being able to use more than 8 different spells in any given encounter.

It's about being able to use the right spells in any given encounter.

That's why you make those strategic choices at level up -- to maximize your tactical options and increase your effectiveness in combat.

 

The DAI 8 ability restriction nullifies those strategic choices by removing tactical options for the sole purpose of making you less effective in combat.

[leaguer of one]

 

It's about being able to use the right spells in any given encounter.

That's why you make those strategic choices at level up -- to maximize your tactical options and increase your effectiveness in combat.

 

The DAI 8 ability restriction nullifies those strategic choices by removing tactical options for the sole purpose of making you less effective in combat.

DAI doesn't do that. It makes organizes and plan which spell to have before fights. It removes nothing tactical. It just makes you look before leaping. It's no different then preparing spells for the day in DnD. It's no different then bulders gate.

[Jester]

It's no different then bulders gate.

One more person talks about "Bulders gate", and I'm going to punch somebody.

Who the hell is "bulders" supposed to be?

[leaguer of one]

One more person talks about "Bulders gate", and I'm going to punch somebody.

Who the hell is "bulders" supposed to be?

Sorry.....It's "baldur's" gate. 

[In Exile]

At least the vancian magic system D&D used had an in game justification. You weren't memorizing spells you were writing them on your brain just like you would write them on a scroll. Your brain could only hold so much depending on your level and intelligence and when you cast those spells they were gone from your brain just like they would disappear from a scroll.

 

That is such an unbearably stupid justification that no justification would be much better. It's worse the ME3's bullets heatsinks. 

[DV-01]

[Alodar]

That is such an unbearably stupid justification that no justification would be much better. It's worse the ME3's bullets heatsinks. 

 

Your opinion of it notwithstanding that is how the system was implemented by Jack Vance in his books -- hence Vancian magic.

 

 

It makes perfect sense -- and it doesn't require you to like it.

[Alodar]

DAI doesn't do that. It makes organizes and plan which spell to have before fights. It removes nothing tactical. It just makes you look before leaping. It's no different then preparing spells for the day in DnD. It's no different then bulders gate.

 

 

The arbitrary 8 limitation removes tactical options from every combat once you have over 9 active abilities.

It is less tactical by definition.

 

 

 

I still am unsure why you are looking towards the original implementation of Vancian magic in a 37 year old Pen and Paper game as your standard. D&D has evolved from that standard into a more modern game.

 

Regardless old D&D spell progression is different from DAI in significant ways:

 

The memorization of spells in D&D is what made them a limited resource, DAI has cool-downs and mana to achieve that effect.

 

In the D&D world as you went up in level you got more powerful and could cast more spells in any given combat. -- that is not the case in DAI. (We know from the PC demo that at 12th level, if not before, you can already be maxed out on active abilities.)

 

Vancian magic also was a consistent rule that had an in game justification -- the arbitrary restriction of 8 active abilities per combat has no in game justification.

 

As you are comparing this to Baldur's Gate:  At max level, 9th, you could cast 13 different spells in any one combat if you so chose.

In DAI you will never get more than 8.

[leaguer of one]

That is such an unbearably stupid justification that no justification would be much better. It's worse the ME3's bullets heatsinks. 

You do understand that in lore there was a justification for it.

[leaguer of one]

The arbitrary 8 limitation removes tactical options from every combat once you have over 9 active abilities.

It is less tactical by definition.

 

 

 

I still am unsure why you are looking towards the original implementation of Vancian magic in a 37 year old Pen and Paper game as your standard. D&D has evolved from that standard into a more modern game.

 

Regardless old D&D spell progression is different from DAI in significant ways:

 

The memorization of spells in D&D is what made them a limited resource, DAI has cool-downs and mana to achieve that effect.

 

In the D&D world as you went up in level you got more powerful and could cast more spells in any given combat. -- that is not the case in DAI. (We know from the PC demo that at 12th level, if not before, you can already be maxed out on active abilities.)

 

Vancian magic also was a consistent rule that had an in game justification -- the arbitrary restriction of 8 active abilities per combat has no in game justification.

 

As you are comparing this to Baldur's Gate:  At max level, 9th, you could cast 13 different spells in any one combat if you so chose.

In DAI you will never get more than 8.

And that's understandable. BG you can only use a few spells per day. That's 13  spells cast before running out and needing to ready for the next day. DAI spells you can use them as much as you want as long as had the mana. It's easier to work with less because you can use the spells over and over again. And it's not like you can switch out the spells before a fight.

[In Exile]

You do understand that in lore there was a justification for it.

 

Yes. It was incredibly stupid.