Most authors seem to disagree, the more powerful a wizard becomes, the less power he uses.
This is true for Merlin: He gives Uther a different appearance, he raises a mist, but that's pretty much it. He later helps some boy getting a sword and lets the boy/young man throw down the evil king. He could have crushed Tintagel by his will alone. He could have turned Uther into a toad when he became a mad ruler. He didn't.
It is true for Gandalf: He is easily able to slay half a dozen goblins by his will alone (he does that in the cave in "the Hobbit") and it was stated later that he could "kill many as he comes down on them like a thunderbolt". Yet, he struggles to fight them hand-to-hand every time he encounters them.
Together with the other 4 wizards, he drove Sauron away from Dol Guldur. Yet, apart from giving guidance, he did next to nothing during the war of the Ring.
It is true for Dumbledore (the one in the books that Rowling wrote herself, i.e. books 1-3). He is the greatest wizard of all times, the only one whom Riddle ever feared. He can do things that are difficult to experienced wizards at will. Yet, he leaves it to a 11 year old boy to rescue the world. He does give him guidance, every time, but it remains the boy's task to save the world. Every other wizard is seen doing more magic in the household than the greatest wizard in the world does to combat the arch enemy.
In the Discworld novels, Pratchett explicitly states how important it is not to use magic, the more powerful a wizard you are. It's a running gag in the Witch series that witches do dirty labour (do what has to be done) and use "headology" and "boffo" to make people comply, although they could as well use magic.
I propose that Mages by nature should be unbalanced and therefore hax.
To be honest your argument is silly. Because if something can kill something else EVERYONE wants it and researches it and similar.
If magic existed it would as part of any warriors arsenal as a machine gun or a grenade. That said there is still a massive difference between a ballistic missile fired from a submarine, and the same level of skill and difference you're trying to get at.
Essentially this means that no matter how powerful your mages are: you're fighting people just as powerful as yourself, people who don't fear you as a god(sufficiently powerful kind), and you're just as at risk as the enemy.
_______
the reason "story" magic is soo different is because it takes place in our world.
The reason not everyone can be a wizard is either one of birth, ie they arent born with the power or they aren't smart enough to handle it. It doesnt make sense for everyone to be a mage like it is in games.
i agree mages should be op and deal extreme dmg and be like gods. Skyrim sucked because spells were weak and ignorable, they should have dealt 400% more dmg.
1) limitation: to cast powerfull spells they need ingredients. Ingredients act like "spells memorised per rest in dnd" and this is what adds difficulty to the mage class. Do you use omega artifact level spells to survive this battle or not ? you may need it later.
You can cast the spell disintegrate or finger of death to instantly destroy anything even if it is 99999999999 levels above you however the ingredients are too rare like 1-2 per game.
Ingredients:
2) storywise: unaffected. Just add "bluff / alazony dialog options" to mage class.
3) It makes sense everyone to be able to become a mage, magic should be something common.
If you want to play crappy real world, go play big brother, not a fantasy game.
Warrior vs mage pvp:
1) Anti-mage spec warrior : aura of silence. Nuff said instant win.
2) Buffed before battle Mage: mage goes in melee and kills the warrior with his sword in 3 hits and takes almost no dmg.
3) potionspammer warrrior: unlimited hp = unkillable.
A warrior could use weapons enchanted by magic to have a chance to cast a mage spell, e.g 1% cast to instantly kill the target.
or 40% chance to cast fireball.
Actually now that i realise it the pvp in this system will suck as it will be a 0/1 binary choice, its instant win or instant lose. No choice. No skillshots. Player action cant change the outcome and realies too much on "stats".
Well the solution is simple, disable rare/artifact spells, potions in pvp.
1) limitation: to cast powerfull spells they need ingredients. Ingredients act like "spells memorised per rest in dnd" and this is what adds difficulty to the mage class. Do you use omega artifact level spells to survive this battle or not ? you may need it later.
You can cast the spell disintegrate or finger of death to instantly destroy anything even if it is 99999999999 levels above you however the ingredients are too rare like 1-2 per game.
Ingredients:
- casual ingredients: blink, cc, and med dmg spells (30-40% hp damage).
- rare ingredients: strong spells with 7 sec stun (works on bosses), or spells that kill simple enemies, deal 60% dmg against elites, 40% dmg against bosses. These are really expensive, cost ~= all gold generated per dungeon.
- artifact ingredients: op spells that can instantly destroy the entire universe in 1 button press.
2) storywise: unaffected. Just add "bluff / alazony dialog options" to mage class.
3) It makes sense everyone to be able to become a mage, magic should be something common.
If you want to play crappy real world, go play big brother, not a fantasy game.
Warrior vs mage pvp:
1) Anti-mage spec warrior : aura of silence. Nuff said instant win.
2) Buffed before battle Mage: mage goes in melee and kills the warrior with his sword in 3 hits and takes almost no dmg.
3) potionspammer warrrior: unlimited hp = unkillable.
A warrior could use weapons enchanted by magic to have a chance to cast a mage spell, e.g 1% cast to instantly kill the target.
or 40% chance to cast fireball.
Actually now that i realise it the pvp in this system will suck as it will be a 0/1 binary choice, its instant win or instant lose. No choice. No skillshots. Player action cant change the outcome and realies too much on "stats".
Well the solution is simple, disable rare/artifact spells, potions in pvp.
[quote name='lithos' timestamp='1330998295' post='4919647']
To be honest your argument is silly. Because if something can kill something else EVERYONE wants it and researches it and similar.
If magic existed it would as part of any warriors arsenal as a machine gun or a grenade. That said there is still a massive difference between a ballistic missile fired from a submarine, and the same level of skill and difference you're trying to get at.
Essentially this means that no matter how powerful your mages are: you're fighting people just as powerful as yourself, people who don't fear you as a god(sufficiently powerful kind), and you're just as at risk as the enemy.
_______
the reason "story" magic is soo different is because it takes place in our world.
The reason not everyone can be a wizard is either one of birth, ie they arent born with the power or they aren't smart enough to handle it. It doesnt make sense for everyone to be a mage like it is in games.
[/quote]
I don't really like this line of arguement because we're dealing with fiction you can whip up any type of story element that you want.
evolution demands that if a form of energy exisists life takes advantage of it, so I don't really like that story element.
Since this is in Game Design, I'll reply to this from a game design perspective. It seems like everyone else is replying to this as though either 1) balancing the game is not in the question or 2) you're writing a story.
First, if I were to play a game like this, I would probably quit within a week if it was an MMORPG/RPG that used a magic system like this and only had Mage as an available class. However, you've really given no architecture for the game itself. I'm not aware if there are other classes, if it's supposed to be an MMORPG or an RPG or an RTS, and the list goes on. Because of that, I'm not entirely sure if I'd want to play it very long or not, though it's pretty safe to say I'd probably not be very interested.
Second, a problem I see is that you are disregarding balance: you're only mentioning mages in your game, and you're specifically catering to the kinds of players who enjoy playing mages. If mages will slowly become better and better as you play and get new artifacts and slay dragons, why would you even want to play a warrior at all? Might as well cash in on those extra benefits if you're going to play the game.
Third, PvP options would pretty much be thrown to the wind if you attempted a system like this in a game that included PvP. You'd have to find some way of judging how powerful one mage is before pitting it against another mage, otherwise it'd be completely unfair.
Fourth, you describe becoming a powerful mage as being hell on earth, a terrible experience, and a horrible time. Why include a system that encourages these kinds of experiences in your game? If players aren't having fun, they're going to quit. If they feel they can't get better unless they jump into a pit of flames (in real life, mind you), then they'll quit. It looks like you're trying to make a game where you introduce a string of unbalanced systems that are only accessible to those who have 200 hours to spare getting there.
First, if I were to play a game like this, I would probably quit within a week if it was an MMORPG/RPG that used a magic system like this and only had Mage as an available class. However, you've really given no architecture for the game itself. I'm not aware if there are other classes, if it's supposed to be an MMORPG or an RPG or an RTS, and the list goes on. Because of that, I'm not entirely sure if I'd want to play it very long or not, though it's pretty safe to say I'd probably not be very interested.
Second, a problem I see is that you are disregarding balance: you're only mentioning mages in your game, and you're specifically catering to the kinds of players who enjoy playing mages. If mages will slowly become better and better as you play and get new artifacts and slay dragons, why would you even want to play a warrior at all? Might as well cash in on those extra benefits if you're going to play the game.
Third, PvP options would pretty much be thrown to the wind if you attempted a system like this in a game that included PvP. You'd have to find some way of judging how powerful one mage is before pitting it against another mage, otherwise it'd be completely unfair.
Fourth, you describe becoming a powerful mage as being hell on earth, a terrible experience, and a horrible time. Why include a system that encourages these kinds of experiences in your game? If players aren't having fun, they're going to quit. If they feel they can't get better unless they jump into a pit of flames (in real life, mind you), then they'll quit. It looks like you're trying to make a game where you introduce a string of unbalanced systems that are only accessible to those who have 200 hours to spare getting there.
Warriors vs mages in all rpg games.
Warriors:
1) have unlimited "blue juice".
2) win in pve raid dps but suck in pvp against mages.
3) are meatshields having huge hp.
4) can ignore positioning in battle.
5) can zerg enemies.
Mages:
1) can permakite warriors.
2) deals more damage than warriors.
3) when mage runs out of mana he is dead.
4) squishy.
5) can die in 1 warrior combo.
6) can attack from range.
7) can aoe in large group battles and win.
@GHMP
you must refer to the ingredients.
the rare/artifact ingredients are like consumable items so playing for 200 hours just to get 1 charge, will mean nothing since they will lose them after 1 battle.
Conserving Rare / artifact level spells are more suited in a roguelike game. Do you die now ? or use your rare spells to survive this encounter. Players who are prepared for the battle may get away with casual spells.
Warriors:
1) have unlimited "blue juice".
2) win in pve raid dps but suck in pvp against mages.
3) are meatshields having huge hp.
4) can ignore positioning in battle.
5) can zerg enemies.
Mages:
1) can permakite warriors.
2) deals more damage than warriors.
3) when mage runs out of mana he is dead.
4) squishy.
5) can die in 1 warrior combo.
6) can attack from range.
7) can aoe in large group battles and win.
@GHMP
you must refer to the ingredients.
the rare/artifact ingredients are like consumable items so playing for 200 hours just to get 1 charge, will mean nothing since they will lose them after 1 battle.
Conserving Rare / artifact level spells are more suited in a roguelike game. Do you die now ? or use your rare spells to survive this encounter. Players who are prepared for the battle may get away with casual spells.
The problem I see here is that Merlin, or whichever god-like wizard you choose, is old, wise, and knowledgeable of this immense power called magic, whereas the average gamer is an obnoxious tool. Acharis probably gives the best solution, limiting these uber wizards while creating a second tier of pseudo-uber wizards (the assistants who will most likely be the next to overthrow the currently residing god-wizard) and also creating a pvp game mechanic where wizards struggle for control of these towers. Further, the wizard's enhanced power could be limited to a certain range of his tower, creating zones where different god-wizards reign suppreme. But your challenge here, also stated by Acharis, is still how to attract players to the lesser non-wizard roles. Why do I want to be a swordsman or an archer when I will never be as important a figure as a wizard?
As AdrianC said regarding permadeath, think of the old game Gemstone III. Warriors were the easier class to start out, jumping right into battle and quickly gaining levels with their high constitution and strength, but at higher levels warriors became more of a phenomena since the entire persona of the Warrior is to place itself in danger. The most common high level classes were Empaths, a largely non-combat class, because they could gain experience slowly but incredibly safely by healing in towns. Wizards and Sorcerers were slower to start than Warriors in Gemstone III, since they could not jump into combat like the Warrior, but would attain powerful spells later on which would compensate, if not overcompensate, for their weakness. With your realist approach to the wizard's level of power you have to consider how the wizard attains this power. Since that power is attained through studies, or mental exertions instead of physical, the wizard will never gain any HP or toughness or capability of sustaining physical damage. With permadeath, this makes the wizard a high-risk high-reward class as even at higher levels one small mistake will put your wizard in life-threatening danger (thus derailing all of that hard work). Wizards having such high potential, yet having such an obvious vulnerability, could make them fun targets for non-wizard classes. Archers become the bane of Wizards, and thus a mundane class now holds power over the seemingly invulnerable. Wizards would be more inclined to make friends and allies with mundane classes early on, promoting community between Wizards and mundane classes (and possibly even campaigns against wizards by former mundane allies spurned upon the wizard's rise to power).
Anyway, just a thought. Good luck, I think this is possible.
As AdrianC said regarding permadeath, think of the old game Gemstone III. Warriors were the easier class to start out, jumping right into battle and quickly gaining levels with their high constitution and strength, but at higher levels warriors became more of a phenomena since the entire persona of the Warrior is to place itself in danger. The most common high level classes were Empaths, a largely non-combat class, because they could gain experience slowly but incredibly safely by healing in towns. Wizards and Sorcerers were slower to start than Warriors in Gemstone III, since they could not jump into combat like the Warrior, but would attain powerful spells later on which would compensate, if not overcompensate, for their weakness. With your realist approach to the wizard's level of power you have to consider how the wizard attains this power. Since that power is attained through studies, or mental exertions instead of physical, the wizard will never gain any HP or toughness or capability of sustaining physical damage. With permadeath, this makes the wizard a high-risk high-reward class as even at higher levels one small mistake will put your wizard in life-threatening danger (thus derailing all of that hard work). Wizards having such high potential, yet having such an obvious vulnerability, could make them fun targets for non-wizard classes. Archers become the bane of Wizards, and thus a mundane class now holds power over the seemingly invulnerable. Wizards would be more inclined to make friends and allies with mundane classes early on, promoting community between Wizards and mundane classes (and possibly even campaigns against wizards by former mundane allies spurned upon the wizard's rise to power).
Anyway, just a thought. Good luck, I think this is possible.
Oh and what's stopping a level 1 mage from just macroing the incantiation and word?
Just hotkey it and you can spam it like a lvl 3 mage
Just hotkey it and you can spam it like a lvl 3 mage
All that I can say is made moot if this sort of game were made and found a market. My main line of thinking is, "Why have all the grinding, or if it is so hard to become a Merlin-level wizard why is the game rewarding a player with more advantages when they clearly are already very skilled?"
This entire thread boils down to that old RPG trope (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/BraggingRightsReward) of defeating the most impossibly hard enemy in a game to get the very best damage-dealer (spell, weapon, etc.) only to realize that the only situation in which this item would have felt really rewarding to use would be the very challenge required to attain it.
This entire thread boils down to that old RPG trope (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/BraggingRightsReward) of defeating the most impossibly hard enemy in a game to get the very best damage-dealer (spell, weapon, etc.) only to realize that the only situation in which this item would have felt really rewarding to use would be the very challenge required to attain it.
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement