Casting without reagents?

Ok, and archers shouldn't have to play hybrids either ;> Don't force your playstyle on them.

Don't know why you're getting defensive, I'm just presenting my point of view.

 

There's a big difference between the 2. Archers are RANGED where mages can do ranged or close combat. A pure archer will always be at a disadvantage as they are relying solely on a bow that is not a close weapon.

You're basically comparing an apple to a grapefruit.

 

There's a only big difference depending on what rules you put in the game. If you create rules that say a mage doesn't really need requirements to cast spells, then there is a difference. If you create rules that say they do need requirements, than there isn't a difference.

A game I play sometimes is Path of Exile, an ARPG, where you can fire all sorts of magical arrows point blank and you never have to switch to a hand weapon. They could also choose to do archery that way in SoTA, and not cripple archers in close combat.

So the issue to me is just that I don't see a good reason why mages shouldn't need a fallback skill just like archers do.

 

That's simple, because a mages fallback skill is another magic skill. In this game it is ranged combat skill which is grouped with the other physical attacks. A blade master with no ranged is at a range disadvantage. With magic, if you're a life mage you have no attack except undead, so you have a choice.
1) you can pick up a melee skill
2) add another magic school that has a better rounded attack.

If a person wants to play a hybrid that's their choice. But if they want to play a pure mage the skills are there to do so. The issue is the current mechanics make a magic user inferior to a warrior.

 

Yep, but in my view a fallback weapon doesn't make a character a hybrid class, its just backup. Its only hybrid if you use it in your main repertoire. Hopefully, the mage would always be prepared for his magic. I also don't agree that mages are inferior in the game.

But I'm not trying to make this personal or force this issue on the devs and make them change their minds : we can agree to disagree.

Here's a question : if you were convinced magic was more powerful than weapons and fighters were inferior to powerful mages, would you have a different opinion?

 

If you have to waste skill points on it it is a hybrid.

If the roles were reversed so would my argument. If a player wants to be a pure fighter he should be able to. I'm for choice and equality. The whole point of a classless system is to build the character you want and I'm just arguing to make as many choices available.

 

Here is a question. Where the hell do you even get Reagents? I've talked to shop owners, vendors etc and haven't seen a single one. Do you have to find them in the wild for now or what?

 

Bar tenders/tavern keepers. Firelotus in is one

 

Me, I think there should be cases were a fighter needs help. If not a mage with him, then some type of item made by a mage. Fighting ghosts, elementals, etc.

 

If this were a grouping game I would agree. But since folks are suppose to be able to solo most content should be able kill things alone.

That being said I'm 100% sure there will be group content as well as raids.

Maybe the fighter could get his sword enchanted vs undead or elementals.

 

Ahem.... P R E - A L P H A

Did I say it slow enough for you?

^^^ sarcasm

need a (((HUG)))?

 

Haha.. I'm well aware that this is pre-alpha. Which is why it's the most opportune time to voice my thoughts. Once release occurs there will be significant momentum and changing certain aspects of the game may become undisirable.

Did I spell that out clearly enough for you?

^^^ sarcasm

Need a tissue ?

 

I'm ok with a ramping up approach to reagents too - provided that there is a reasonable balance with melee players who have the added issues of slugs in the deck and the need to close a gap with a ranged player.

 

Just to add to this thread --- up until this point, the devs have been pretty liberal about mages casting magic with weapons equipped in both hands.

What do you guys here think about requiring mages to have at least one hand open, so a mage couldn't be using both a sword and shield , or a two-handed hammer ? Staves, of course, use two hands to fight with, but can be held with one hand.. plus, they could also be considered conducive to magic, even if considered a two-handed weapon. Although, there are other weapons that require two hands to fight with, but one hand to hold, like bows.

Having two hands full could merely increase the fizzle rate, if restricting the actual casting isn't possible. Plus, having both hands open (no weapons at all) could reduce the fizzle rate.

 

mage with swords really seems ackward...

the mages I know can't lift a fork properly...

 

@redfish, I think players that pour all their skills into building a mage deck should be incentivized to not use any weapon. My idealist view of a mage is where nearly no weapons are used, except for say a magic wand, staff, or dagger. With hybrid decks that use some magic, it seems like maybe a bad move to force those guys to disarm inorder to cast. However casting with a shield in one hand and a sword in the other doesn't sit well with me either. I like your fizzle idea. Increase the fizzle probability depending on the weapon in-hand...

 

Yes, if they have to ;> Personally I like the requirement of at least one hand free, too. But the fizzle idea is an alternative in case that doesn't wash, and also a way to make two hands free an advantage, too.

 

I feel that having the need for ammo and spell ammo (reagents) really limits builds to be always melee based and then you on the side have a bow or a magic finger that you can cast some spells. So everyone is going to have a sword or mace and combat that way most of the time, but at times when **** hits the fan or they are trying to gain an early advantage they will cast a few spells or shoot a few arrows to do some early damage. So do we all really only want the game to be all melee pretty much all of the time?

Also, this is far from a new problem, its in all games and even in movies/TV and even includes modern weapons - guns and ammo. Most of the time you don't see an archer in a movie fletch and/or use up his 50 arrows and then not be effective again until he finds more or makes more. So its a problem that plagues everything in ranged/magic vs traditional physical melee damage mechanics. So, I wouldn't expect the perfect resolution to this to be found in this game, but hopefully they can have it work out so overall combat in game will be effective and fun for all "builds"

I do think that having something like reagent durability would be something to explore so a Mage isnt spending all of their money on reagents to cast their elemental and T4 spells.. where a warrior who has some points in fire can be almost as effective as the mage casting the same t1-3 spells. Or maybe the more points you invest in magic trees gives you more advantage over someone who has only invested a few and casts the same spells as you. .. otherwise the world will be boring with just people bashing each other with melee weapons most of the time.

 

What I don't like about the magic system is that is just skills. Basically you learn them by yourself, and you don't need anything to cast a spell - you do get a boost if you use reagents.
I would have imagined that you would have to find spells in old tomes hidden in some ruins or you have to visit a powerful wizard who teaches you a new spell. And you would have a spellbook in which you inscribe the spells. Something interesting with more to it than simply learning a skill by spending skillpoints.

This does also apply to regular skills. You just learn them by yourself?
The more I think about it the more I get the impression that the whole skill system is a very easy not to say dumbed down system. It doesn't matter if it is a new attack, a new spell or a crafting skill, you learn them by yourself simply by spending skillpoints... There is no meat to this, nothing special, nothing really interesting. We will have many skills, ok, but basically obtaining them will not be a very interesting thing in the game.
You don't have to find trainers who can teach you a new attack or find a new spell...
I think what we get now is quantity over quality...
Thinking about the old Ultimas this makes me sad as in those games it was interesting getting a new spell and you couldn't use them like any other skill making it something special to cast spell...

 

Agree 100%. I would only carry a staff as a pure mage and of course that would be charged with spells as well