Larian Banner: Baldur's Gate Patch 9
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3
Joined: Oct 2017
A
Ariel~ Offline OP
stranger
OP Offline
stranger
A
Joined: Oct 2017
Plenty of magic armor, and by the time I manage to remove it I'm spending most of my AP trying to stay alive.

I feel like armor should only protect against hard CC and direct damage (stun,petrify, etc) but not against soft cc and DoTs (shock, burn, poison and so on;), dots would still go through the shield of course.

Phys damage reigns supreme because mages simply can't compete, [i]there are no long range hard hitting spells.[/i] And when you have the most powerful CC abilities in the warfare/poly/scoundrel tree along with the ability to remove physical armor safely from a distance the only reason you'd ever go mage is because you enjoy the playstyle, the few moments it works that is...

PS: This game is still awesome, but if we could only get a balance patch it'd be super awesome.

Last edited by Ariel~; 10/10/17 08:51 PM.
Joined: Jul 2017
F
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
F
Joined: Jul 2017
Yeah im currently playing mage with a shield focused mostly into Geo with a shield for massive armour. I use melee weapon so i can use the warfare abilitys because usually i strip physical faster with bouncing shield and reactive armour. Then i cast shackle of pain and get close and use AEs on myself and the enemies alike. I am very sturdy with living armour and necromancy so this tactic works great. I buff my physical armour to 2.6k at lvl 12 and my magic armour keeps regenerating as i deal damage and use posion spells (i am undead). Its the ultimate tank

Joined: Sep 2017
M
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
M
Joined: Sep 2017
i do think mages should be buffed, but i primarily play main character mages and i never feel useless

it's kind of bad that staves are basically useless on higher difficulties since wand + shield is practically a necessity

Joined: Oct 2017
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Oct 2017
You sound like you're playing solo. You didn't mention your team.

This is probably gonna sound obvious, but as a mage you need to focus the bruisers, and vice versa, your bruisers focus the casters. While it's true that there is no physical resistance, it is still the mages that deal insane AOE damage and cc's. Not the physical fighters.

You also want to maximize the effectiveness of your damaging spells. For example, casting Rain first to cause Wet and reduce their Air/Water resistance. I don't know what schools you're focusing on, but it's best not to spread your points too much early.

Or, let's say you have Supernova. That spell deals huge damage, but hard to use. It centers on yourself, has small AOE, and also damages yourself. So if you want to make full use of it, you probably want some teleport-type spell like Phoenix Dive or Cloak and Dagger, to easily get yourself into good position. Also some way to buff your magic armor cause the spell damages you too.

That's the idea. I mean, I have to say that, to really maximize your combat power, you want to combine spells from different school so that they "combo". Personally, I had Lohse going with Air/Water, and I think that combo is crazy strong in terms of both damage and cc potential.


"We make our choices and take what comes and the rest is void."
Joined: Jan 2014
L
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
L
Joined: Jan 2014
Originally Posted by miaasma
i do think mages should be buffed, but i primarily play main character mages and i never feel useless

it's kind of bad that staves are basically useless on higher difficulties since wand + shield is practically a necessity


Blatantly untrue.

Joined: Jan 2009
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Jan 2009
It sounds like the OP is playing in a 3 Physical/1 Magic team, which would certainly be underpowered. I have struggled at times with a 2 Physical/2 Magic team.

Mages do have many long range high damage attacks, at least once in Act 2.

I have however given up on using dual-wands on my Wizard and switched to Wand + Shield because I was sick and tired of the AI focusing the wizard down.

Joined: Jan 2014
L
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
L
Joined: Jan 2014
CC your enemies. Kill your enemies. Don't be in line of sight of your enemies. Be invisible to your enemies. Play dead. Make it nearly impossible for the enemy to reach you. Let your mage die, ressurect at the near end of the round as a ghetto Skin Graft.

You have a lot of tools and resources at your disposal to ensure that your experience isn't hampered.

Joined: Oct 2017
A
Ariel~ Offline OP
stranger
OP Offline
stranger
A
Joined: Oct 2017
Originally Posted by Limz
CC your enemies. Kill your enemies. Don't be in line of sight of your enemies. Be invisible to your enemies. Play dead. Make it nearly impossible for the enemy to reach you. Let your mage die, ressurect at the near end of the round as a ghetto Skin Graft.

You have a lot of tools and resources at your disposal to ensure that your experience isn't hampered.


But I don't have issues winning fights, I just feel like my mage isn't contributing as much as I was hoping.

Joined: Sep 2017
M
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
M
Joined: Sep 2017
Originally Posted by Limz
Originally Posted by miaasma
i do think mages should be buffed, but i primarily play main character mages and i never feel useless

it's kind of bad that staves are basically useless on higher difficulties since wand + shield is practically a necessity


Blatantly untrue.

can you elaborate? like how is this a useful response, ever, aside from posturing
Originally Posted by Limz
CC your enemies. Kill your enemies. Don't be in line of sight of your enemies. Be invisible to your enemies. Play dead. Make it nearly impossible for the enemy to reach you. Let your mage die, ressurect at the near end of the round as a ghetto Skin Graft.

You have a lot of tools and resources at your disposal to ensure that your experience isn't hampered.

like, this is all useless information for people who play on classical difficulty and above. are you assuming everyone who has an issue with mages right now is just incompetent?

Last edited by miaasma; 10/10/17 11:02 PM.
Joined: Oct 2017
I
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
I
Joined: Oct 2017
What build are you using and what is your team comp. You may just be doing it wrong.


gambling on some rng cc affect is not a deep strategic decision. It's just a sign of gambling addiction.
Joined: Jan 2014
L
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
L
Joined: Jan 2014
Originally Posted by miaasma
Originally Posted by Limz
Originally Posted by miaasma
i do think mages should be buffed, but i primarily play main character mages and i never feel useless

it's kind of bad that staves are basically useless on higher difficulties since wand + shield is practically a necessity


Blatantly untrue.

can you elaborate? like how is this a useful response, ever, aside from posturing
Originally Posted by Limz
CC your enemies. Kill your enemies. Don't be in line of sight of your enemies. Be invisible to your enemies. Play dead. Make it nearly impossible for the enemy to reach you. Let your mage die, ressurect at the near end of the round as a ghetto Skin Graft.

You have a lot of tools and resources at your disposal to ensure that your experience isn't hampered.

like, this is all useless information for people who play on classical difficulty and above. are you assuming everyone who has an issue with mages right now is just incompetent?


Are you not? Is this game 100% intuitive? Have you refactored your questions so it can be answered appropriately?

You're the one who is using a wand/shield and coming to me with the claim that you're competent when I am saying it's blatantly false on both accounts that you need a wand/shield and that staves are useless.

Have you ever asked the question, "Things are hitting me, how do I ensure that they don't hit me?" Have you looked at your own game plan and wondered why you have deviated so far? Have you looked through the Wiki and poured through the skill lists to see your options? Have you embraced the fact that health is a resource? Have you ever wondered how stupid and frustrating your statement is to someone who rolled up a glass cannon character(s)?

I really don't know your answers to these things so elaborating on specific points is not exactly a requirement. But what I do know is that you use a wand/shield and I don't and I play on tactician.

So, tell me, have you been using invis pots, do you have chameleon? Are you willing to use resurrection scrolls as your game plan? Have you put a premium on movement to manipulate Line-of-Sight? Have you been positioning properly? Have you been using other alternatives to invisibility and movement such as smoke? In a matter of fact, what is your game plan?

You have people on the forums claiming how easy tactician is, or how much nothing matters beyond the first round, or whatever else. You also have the fact that Rangers, 2H fighters, and Rogues don't have shields... yet they all seem to get along fine. But here you are... claiming that you absolutely need a wand/shield and that staves are useless (you must really hate having guaranteed +12 int weapon before Arx on a single item or 20% crit).


Joined: Jan 2014
L
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
L
Joined: Jan 2014
Originally Posted by Ariel~

But I don't have issues winning fights, I just feel like my mage isn't contributing as much as I was hoping.
Originally Posted by Igniz13
What build are you using and what is your team comp. You may just be doing it wrong.


Pretty much what Igniz wrote; you'll need to supply us with a bit more information as to what your game plan, your party composition, your expectations of the foe variety/density, your play style, and your criteria of 'enough contribution'.

For example, let's just say at the Alexander fight at around level 8, if my mage who goes first can CC Alexander and deal some amount of health damage then he/she has done their job with minimal to no exploits then I consider that competitive and the mage to have fully contributed (because Alexander will be dead by the second or third character). How the mage gets there within those parameters doesn't matter as much but your expectations might not be the same.

I could tell you how to do it and what the bare minimums you would need to do it, but if you're going to say "but that's close for comfort" then we're more limited on our options to make your vision work.

Joined: Sep 2017
Location: Florida
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
Joined: Sep 2017
Location: Florida
I feel mages are semi weak early game, but mid to late they shine.

It also seems like shields are very important not even so much for survival, but 99% of enemies seem to go for whoever on your team has the least armor and the more you have the less of a priority you are.

Last edited by BoogieMan; 11/10/17 12:09 PM.
Joined: Oct 2017
A
Ariel~ Offline OP
stranger
OP Offline
stranger
A
Joined: Oct 2017
Originally Posted by Limz
Originally Posted by Ariel~

But I don't have issues winning fights, I just feel like my mage isn't contributing as much as I was hoping.
Originally Posted by Igniz13
What build are you using and what is your team comp. You may just be doing it wrong.


Pretty much what Igniz wrote; you'll need to supply us with a bit more information as to what your game plan, your party composition, your expectations of the foe variety/density, your play style, and your criteria of 'enough contribution'.

For example, let's just say at the Alexander fight at around level 8, if my mage who goes first can CC Alexander and deal some amount of health damage then he/she has done their job with minimal to no exploits then I consider that competitive and the mage to have fully contributed (because Alexander will be dead by the second or third character). How the mage gets there within those parameters doesn't matter as much but your expectations might not be the same.

I could tell you how to do it and what the bare minimums you would need to do it, but if you're going to say "but that's close for comfort" then we're more limited on our options to make your vision work.


My party comp atm is 2 phys damage dealers (d/d poly/scoundrel and crossbow huntsman/poly), 1 bruiser (sword/shield warfare/necro/geo) and the mage with at least two points on each elemental attribute.

Generally I want to burst down a priority target on the first round or at least get through their armor to chicken claw so I can kill it in two, bruiser stands in the front soaking up damage and softening armor so it'll hopefully get a few knockdowns mid fight.

As for the mage, initially I built her to be a control mage and when that didn't work I just loaded her up with a ton of party buffs and initiative so she's mostly a support now, Peace of mind allows either the ranger or rogue to play 2 turns in a row by delaying their initial turn for max burst potential.


Last edited by Ariel~; 11/10/17 02:49 PM.
Joined: Sep 2017
M
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
M
Joined: Sep 2017
Originally Posted by Limz

Are you not? Is this game 100% intuitive? Have you refactored your questions so it can be answered appropriately?

ah yes, forgive me for not seeing the inherent wisdom contained in a post consisting of "Blatantly untrue". next time i'll consider myself lucky that i've been graced by such genius contribution
Quote

You're the one who is using a wand/shield and coming to me with the claim that you're competent when I am saying it's blatantly false on both accounts that you need a wand/shield and that staves are useless.

i didn't come to you with anything, you quoted my post about staves paling in comparison to wand + shield, vocalized your disagreement and did not elaborate at all. i asked you why you even made the post to begin with if you were just going to be contrarian rather than actually address what it is about my post that is wrong. i'm not sure what's hard to understand about this
Quote

Have you ever asked the question, "Things are hitting me, how do I ensure that they don't hit me?" Have you looked at your own game plan and wondered why you have deviated so far? Have you looked through the Wiki and poured through the skill lists to see your options? Have you embraced the fact that health is a resource? Have you ever wondered how stupid and frustrating your statement is to someone who rolled up a glass cannon character(s)?

quite a lot of assumptions to make about someone whose play you know absolutely nothing about (aside from mage weapon wielding). it's really impressive you think highly enough of yourself that people who have experiences that differ from yours must not consider "health a resource"(lol) or have thought about "killing their enemies"
Quote

I really don't know your answers to these things so elaborating on specific points is not exactly a requirement. But what I do know is that you use a wand/shield and I don't and I play on tactician.

So, tell me, have you been using invis pots, do you have chameleon? Are you willing to use resurrection scrolls as your game plan? Have you put a premium on movement to manipulate Line-of-Sight? Have you been positioning properly? Have you been using other alternatives to invisibility and movement such as smoke? In a matter of fact, what is your game plan?

oh, wow, forty erroneous claims later you actually bothered to ask me how i play? that's weird, i thought everything i typed before was universally wrong regardless of how i play? why show this type of curiosity now?

for the record, yes, i do use chameleon, i do not use resurrection scrolls as a part of my strategy because dying is not a strategic decision without investing in morning person, which is unnecessary when i could just not die to begin with

once more, you're asking questions that are completely worthless to anyone who plays above classic mode. "do you play with line of sight?" really? why not just assume everyone is five years of age?
Quote

You have people on the forums claiming how easy tactician is, or how much nothing matters beyond the first round, or whatever else. You also have the fact that Rangers, 2H fighters, and Rogues don't have shields... yet they all seem to get along fine. But here you are... claiming that you absolutely need a wand/shield and that staves are useless (you must really hate having guaranteed +12 int weapon before Arx on a single item or 20% crit).

rangers, 2h fighters and rogues all get armor that makes a shield unnecessary, while mages do not without investing in points in str or finesse, so that's an awful comparison, and shows how little thought you've actually put into your criticism

i'm here claiming that using a staff over wand + shield is inefficient because while staves tend to have better stats, shields provide a lot of armor/blocking that saves you especially when fights automatically place you into poor positions. honestly, your post kind of makes the argument for me. look at the number of things you suggested so as to not die immediately at the beginning of the fight when holding a shield works just as well

i'm sure you meant well with your condescending two-word response but unfortunately you came across as dismissive and unhelpful, and this post did not change that perception. i'm sure using staves can be viable as i'm not an expert on this game. you, being the original sin 2 mage aficionado, could surely bring us plebeians out of the depths of our video game ignorance with a little more finesse

Last edited by miaasma; 11/10/17 02:54 PM.
Joined: Oct 2017
D
stranger
Offline
stranger
D
Joined: Oct 2017
Originally Posted by Limz
Originally Posted by Ariel~

But I don't have issues winning fights, I just feel like my mage isn't contributing as much as I was hoping.
Originally Posted by Igniz13
What build are you using and what is your team comp. You may just be doing it wrong.


Pretty much what Igniz wrote; you'll need to supply us with a bit more information as to what your game plan, your party composition, your expectations of the foe variety/density, your play style, and your criteria of 'enough contribution'.

For example, let's just say at the Alexander fight at around level 8, if my mage who goes first can CC Alexander and deal some amount of health damage then he/she has done their job with minimal to no exploits then I consider that competitive and the mage to have fully contributed (because Alexander will be dead by the second or third character). How the mage gets there within those parameters doesn't matter as much but your expectations might not be the same.

I could tell you how to do it and what the bare minimums you would need to do it, but if you're going to say "but that's close for comfort" then we're more limited on our options to make your vision work.


Eh, doesn't he have around 1k magic armor? What exactly are you gonna cast that'll break through that with room left over to CC? I must be doing it wrong but I can't hit those kinds of numbers in one turn with two spells leftover to CC with.

FWIW I can beat this fight with mages but I was surprised to hear you could even do this.

Last edited by dcgregorya; 11/10/17 02:53 PM.
Joined: Oct 2017
I
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
I
Joined: Oct 2017
Originally Posted by Ariel~
Originally Posted by Limz
Originally Posted by Ariel~

But I don't have issues winning fights, I just feel like my mage isn't contributing as much as I was hoping.
Originally Posted by Igniz13
What build are you using and what is your team comp. You may just be doing it wrong.


Pretty much what Igniz wrote; you'll need to supply us with a bit more information as to what your game plan, your party composition, your expectations of the foe variety/density, your play style, and your criteria of 'enough contribution'.

For example, let's just say at the Alexander fight at around level 8, if my mage who goes first can CC Alexander and deal some amount of health damage then he/she has done their job with minimal to no exploits then I consider that competitive and the mage to have fully contributed (because Alexander will be dead by the second or third character). How the mage gets there within those parameters doesn't matter as much but your expectations might not be the same.

I could tell you how to do it and what the bare minimums you would need to do it, but if you're going to say "but that's close for comfort" then we're more limited on our options to make your vision work.


My party comp atm is 2 phys damage dealers (d/d poly/scoundrel and crossbow huntsman/poly), 1 bruiser (sword/shield warfare/necro/geo) and the mage with at least two points on each elemental attribute.

Generally I want to burst down a priority target on the first round or at least get through their armor to chicken claw so I can kill it in two, bruiser stands in the front soaking up damage and softening armor so it'll hopefully get a few knockdowns mid fight.

As for the mage, initially I built her to be a control mage and when that didn't work I just loaded her up with a ton of party buffs and initiative so she's mostly a support now, Peace of mind allows either the ranger or rogue to play 2 turns in a row by delaying their initial turn for max burst potential.



You're putting too much onto one character. They won't have the ap to do everything you'd want from magic. You need to focus on one or two schools at most or you'll end up too strained.

What you're doing can work, but you'll need to get as much int as possible to compensate for the lower skill values. You can get a minimum amount of skill requirements for spells, then pump poly for more int.

If you want to focus on damage, then you're going to need to be more focused.


gambling on some rng cc affect is not a deep strategic decision. It's just a sign of gambling addiction.
Joined: Oct 2017
A
Ariel~ Offline OP
stranger
OP Offline
stranger
A
Joined: Oct 2017
Originally Posted by Igniz13
Originally Posted by Ariel~
Originally Posted by Limz
Originally Posted by Ariel~

But I don't have issues winning fights, I just feel like my mage isn't contributing as much as I was hoping.
Originally Posted by Igniz13
What build are you using and what is your team comp. You may just be doing it wrong.


Pretty much what Igniz wrote; you'll need to supply us with a bit more information as to what your game plan, your party composition, your expectations of the foe variety/density, your play style, and your criteria of 'enough contribution'.

For example, let's just say at the Alexander fight at around level 8, if my mage who goes first can CC Alexander and deal some amount of health damage then he/she has done their job with minimal to no exploits then I consider that competitive and the mage to have fully contributed (because Alexander will be dead by the second or third character). How the mage gets there within those parameters doesn't matter as much but your expectations might not be the same.

I could tell you how to do it and what the bare minimums you would need to do it, but if you're going to say "but that's close for comfort" then we're more limited on our options to make your vision work.


My party comp atm is 2 phys damage dealers (d/d poly/scoundrel and crossbow huntsman/poly), 1 bruiser (sword/shield warfare/necro/geo) and the mage with at least two points on each elemental attribute.

Generally I want to burst down a priority target on the first round or at least get through their armor to chicken claw so I can kill it in two, bruiser stands in the front soaking up damage and softening armor so it'll hopefully get a few knockdowns mid fight.

As for the mage, initially I built her to be a control mage and when that didn't work I just loaded her up with a ton of party buffs and initiative so she's mostly a support now, Peace of mind allows either the ranger or rogue to play 2 turns in a row by delaying their initial turn for max burst potential.



You're putting too much onto one character. They won't have the ap to do everything you'd want from magic. You need to focus on one or two schools at most or you'll end up too strained.

What you're doing can work, but you'll need to get as much int as possible to compensate for the lower skill values. You can get a minimum amount of skill requirements for spells, then pump poly for more int.

If you want to focus on damage, then you're going to need to be more focused.


You're right, I'll keep that in mind next time, thank you.

Joined: Apr 2017
D
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
D
Joined: Apr 2017
In my opinion, mages rely to much on double wand auto-attack to be both viable and straightforward.
Also you should focus your mage to a maximum of 2 combat disciplines for example scoundrel and poly (only do this if you are taking Salvage Sortilege,to make your fire crits go boom very loudly) or necro + summoning (full suport,no heals if no water surfaces to take advantage of).

Joined: Sep 2017
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
Joined: Sep 2017
Here is my opinion on the subject :

Early, I think mages are a bit weak --> few spells, low damages against crazy magic shields, etc
So I built a duo lone wolves team of 2 summoners.

Incarnate champions carry you during the first Act.

Then Act 2 you get much stronger spell (source spells btw), and you start blasting things.
Take critical chance, scoundel, and start making hell rain on the lands below you (just get the high ground you fools).

Then just grab Apotheosis and... you know the rest.

Page 1 of 3 1 2 3

Moderated by  gbnf, Kurnster, Monodon, Stephen_Larian 

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5