|
|
|
stranger
|
OP
stranger
Joined: Dec 2013
|
This topic isn't about balancing because I'm sure that Larian Studios knows by now that Mage > Ranger >>>>> Warrior when it comes to the current balance situation and I'm sure that they're working on it.
But my idea is that currently the Mage is the most fun out of all the other classes due to the way elemental magics work and interact with other elements such as being able to freeze water and whatnot.
My idea is to tweak the Ranger and especially the Warrior combat abilities so that they have an innate element attached to a good chunk of active skills in some way. I would think that it would make the other class skills more interesting and would open up the door in regards to tactics and being able to sort of combo off of other classes. It would also make hybrid classes more interesting since you're no longer regulated to just the Mage class if you want a form of elemental damage.
It would also allow the other classes to "show off" the elemental interactivity more than just with one class that a player might not be interested in playing. Why must the Mage be the only one to have all the cool fun? :]
Any feedback, thoughts and ideas would be welcomed!
Last edited by OpticNerve; 22/12/13 03:18 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Jan 2009
|
There are a few skills like that already. The Warrior can use the Phoenix Dive skill, which does Fire damage, even if the Warrior has no points into Fire Magic or Battle Magic. The Warrior's "Stun" skill actually drops a huge boulder on the enemy's head that does Poison damage as well (and maybe Earth damage) - again, with no points into those schools of magic.
|
|
|
|
|
|
stranger
|
|
stranger
Joined: Apr 2013
|
I imagine this is already be done with elemental weapons, in place of anything inherent in the character skills (it could be done here too for sure. eg the Whirlwind skill could be an Air skill that will put out burning areas etc.)
With weapons you could get some neat events, such as fighting a monster using a lightning weapon while standing in a river? Critical miss? electrify the water, or flaming arrows into pools of oil.
I've yet to find any elemental weapons in the alpha but that could be due to just beginning.
|
|
|
|
|
|
stranger
|
|
OP
stranger
Joined: Dec 2013
|
That's great to hear that those are already in. I would hope that more would be tweaked with elemental side-effects though because a lot of the starting skills in particular are very lackluster in comparison to the Mage's abilities. Having elemental weapons interact with background elements would be very interesting as well although it'd probably be a huge headache to balance I would think  The way the elements interact with each other is such an interesting and unique system that I rarely see in other RPGs and I hope that Larian takes advantage of how cool it is and just doesn't horde it all for one single class.
Last edited by OpticNerve; 22/12/13 03:29 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
member
|
|
member
Joined: Jun 2012
|
Don't forget that classes are just starting points in this game. You can easily have a casting warrior/ranger or a ranger-mage.
That being said, magic is definitely overpowered right now.
Last edited by Baudolino05; 26/12/13 05:53 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
member
|
|
member
Joined: Jun 2012
|
Speaking of combat - balancing issues aside - there are a few problems/missing features that - once addressed - will provide a better overall experience in my opinion.
1- GUI: Right now you can't see the range and the chance to hit of your special abilities, neither the template of your AoE spells. In general there is a lack of information that is detrimental for a turn based game.
2- Facing: considering that D:OS features backstab and flanking, being able to choose where your character is looking at, once he/she has finished to move, would be great.
3-AP Costs/Couldowns/other resources: abilities right now are extremely unbalanced (spells are way better than anything else in the game); the AP cost of potions is definitely too low (Larians should avoid potion spam at any cost), and - without mana - the game lacks any form of resource consumption that prevents players from using their best spells every time they are available. The first issue can be addressed through iteration, the second one through an higher AP cost and/or a cooldown for using potions, the third in many ways: a per day limit to the high level spells/more rounds required to cast them/rare reagents consumed during casting, etc...
4- Initiative Order: Saving AP for the next turn is good, but the lack of delayed actions in the game is jarring. In a turn based game you WANT to interrupt your enemy during his turn. Also being able to manipulate the initiative order by delaying an entire turn would be great: You would have total control over the battle this way.
Last edited by Baudolino05; 26/12/13 09:48 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
apprentice
|
|
apprentice
Joined: Dec 2013
|
I like your list, Baudolino05. It sure looks like you know your stuff when it comes to turn-based combat. : )
On a side note, one thing that I'd like to see tried would be an initiative system somehow similar to the one in heroes of might & magic 5: Basically, the higher your speed/initiative/whatever, the more often you take action. Of course, it shouldnt have side effects like shortening cds or be an OP stat that everyone would focus on, more an alternative playstyle/way to build a character.
The pnp Hero System ruleset use a system that more or less works like this: Each turn is divided in 12 rounds. Most characters have a speed of 2 and thus take action on round 1 & 6, a character with a speed of 3 takes action on rounds 1, 4 & 8. If several characters have action during the same round, then initiative determines which one plays first. Of course it is balanced by several factors like fatigue cost for everything, so characters with high speed get tired faster, and the Speed stat costs a lot more to upgrade than health points or strength. The obvious advantage of such a system is that it's good for simulating fast & nimble characters vs slow, mighty brutes, for instance.
I'm not claiming it would work in D:OS, or necessarly makes the game more interesting, but I think it's an approach that deserves being looked at.
|
|
|
|
|
|
apprentice
|
|
apprentice
Joined: Apr 2013
|
This is not D%D do not suggest Daily limits or reagents on magic. as much as I like D&D that is not the way to do things. cool downs are fine just not a daily limit.
The way to fix some issues is of course to balance the damage a bit but to also add features to weapon based combat. Now I haven't played much of the game and what I have played was mostly mage since at this point I am not going to get into hybridization. But having weapons do non elemental conditions should be the advantage. bleed, poison, cripple, vulnerability. and have moves that synergise with them. say you have an attack that bleeds and then you have an attack that causes vulnerability/weakness (attacks do 50% extra damage) and then finish off with an attack that does 50% extra damage to bleeding targets.
Also weapons should have higher crit chances.
|
|
|
|
|
|
member
|
|
member
Joined: Jun 2012
|
I like your list, Baudolino05. It sure looks like you know your stuff when it comes to turn-based combat. : )
On a side note, one thing that I'd like to see tried would be an initiative system somehow similar to the one in heroes of might & magic 5: Basically, the higher your speed/initiative/whatever, the more often you take action. Of course, it shouldnt have side effects like shortening cds or be an OP stat that everyone would focus on, more an alternative playstyle/way to build a character.
The pnp Hero System ruleset use a system that more or less works like this: Each turn is divided in 12 rounds. Most characters have a speed of 2 and thus take action on round 1 & 6, a character with a speed of 3 takes action on rounds 1, 4 & 8. If several characters have action during the same round, then initiative determines which one plays first. Of course it is balanced by several factors like fatigue cost for everything, so characters with high speed get tired faster, and the Speed stat costs a lot more to upgrade than health points or strength. The obvious advantage of such a system is that it's good for simulating fast & nimble characters vs slow, mighty brutes, for instance.
I'm not claiming it would work in D:OS, or necessarly makes the game more interesting, but I think it's an approach that deserves being looked at. Thanks for the compliment, Grokalibre. As a rule I've nothing against systems where fast characters act more often than slow characters, but In my experience, when you couple this feature with AP you buy a ticket for unbalanced combats (see Wasteland 2 beta, for instance). In a combat system with action points and personal initiative fast characters 1) act first; 2) have more action points, so more agency during their turn. If you give them also additional turns, it becomes EXTREMELY hard to balance the game. This is not D%D do not suggest Daily limits or reagents on magic. as much as I like D&D that is not the way to do things. cool downs are fine just not a daily limit.
The way to fix some issues is of course to balance the damage a bit but to also add features to weapon based combat. Now I haven't played much of the game and what I have played was mostly mage since at this point I am not going to get into hybridization. But having weapons do non elemental conditions should be the advantage. bleed, poison, cripple, vulnerability. and have moves that synergise with them. say you have an attack that bleeds and then you have an attack that causes vulnerability/weakness (attacks do 50% extra damage) and then finish off with an attack that does 50% extra damage to bleeding targets.
Also weapons should have higher crit chances. This is not D&D, so? Original Sin already has classic D&D features like attacks of opportunity and saving throws, why exactly daily limits should be a problem? See, if you ask me, D&D is a clusterfuck of unbalanced, over-complicated and simply boring game mechanics, but it also does a couple of things in the right way, and preventing high level abilities spam is one of this things. You can spend your whole life trying to balance a game, but a level 10 spell/ability will be always better then a level 5 spell/ability. So, why on earth should I save my "Fire Armageddon" spell for an hard encounter when I can cast it on any unlucky goblin that crosses my way? Cooldowns are not the answer to this question. They work fine in combat, NOT BETWEEN combats. To prevent high level abilities spam you can either 1) use more restrictive time limits (I'm not a big fan of this approach, but it could work) 2) use resource consumption (mana, reagents - which, by the way, would be hardly out of place in a game that claims Ultima VII as its main source of inspiration -, whatever...) 3) use trade-offs, my favorite approach (an health cost for high level spells/abilities, for instance). PS: high critical chances just add more unpredictability to game. Hardly a tactical improvement.
Last edited by Baudolino05; 27/12/13 02:01 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
apprentice
|
|
apprentice
Joined: Apr 2013
|
I mean it is not D&D. Lore wise it would make no sense to limit magic to daily use.(weak excuse, I know) The best way to balance magic is to not even allow such powerful spells. That is why DnD is so unbalanced. why play as a warrior when by level 10 a wizard is going to summon a squad of demons and throw town destroying fireballs.
AOE magic should have a cast time which adds a risk to casting as enemies could move out of the way which is why you have warriors restrict their movement. But again. "Fire armageddon" would not be a spell. The spells have to be kept to immediate combat spells as larger more powerful spells would not be feasible to use. sure a very powerful mage could level a city with a "Lava font of mount doom" spell. but it would take several minutes to cast. Think of Dragon ball Z. Goku could defeat all enemies with spirit bomb but that takes too much time.
That is how I feel Magic should be treated. weaker combat spells should be a focus.
A game that gets this right is Fallen enchantress. You get almighty spells that you can use on the campaign map to destroy cities and wipe out armies. but on the combat map you are stuck with Fire dart, Shocking grasp, firestorm (which is only a few meters) ect.
|
|
|
|
|
|
member
|
|
member
Joined: Jun 2012
|
I'm not talking about balancing issues between "classes" (which can be solved through iteration), I'm talking about balancing issues between high-level and low-level abilities, IN GENERAL.
This is an Ultima VII-like RPG. There is no such thing as world map vs combat here. It's a fluid experience. Furthermore, virtually all CRPGs give you more advanced ad powerful tools as you grow up, and this is good, because this way players feel rewarded for their advancements.
Point is: How to prevent high level characters from casting exclusively high level spells/abilities? The answer is: "Limiting their use through mechanical features", like the ones I listed in my previous posts. And a second answer could be:"Implementing a feature that prevent low-level abilities to become obsolete".
More rounds to cast high level spells/abilities is a good mechanic. It's a trade-off (my point n.3), but what if it's not enough? Gameplay comes first. Lore second. You can't renounce to an useful balancing tool just because it doesn't fit the lore.
You change the lore. Problem solved.
Last edited by Baudolino05; 27/12/13 02:06 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Jan 2009
|
I am against reagents/material components for spells because it's basically mana in a more annoying, inconvenient form that confuses people and clutters up the inventory. At that point it's easier to just bring Mana back, and add a 10-turn cooldown to drinking mana potions.
I do like the idea of spells that take one or more turns to prepare before they're actually cast, and I suspect that Larian is also considering that.
I think that longer cooldowns for more powerful spells is another good answer. Forktong's objection to that idea is that people could just sit around and wait for them to recharge. I think that if they do so, that's their prerogative, but some people might not want to wait around for 5 real-time minutes (or more) doing nothing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
member
|
|
member
Joined: Jun 2012
|
I am against reagents/material components for spells because it's basically mana in a more annoying, inconvenient form that confuses people and clutters up the inventory. At that point it's easier to just bring Mana back, and add a 10-turn cooldown to drinking mana potions.
I do like the idea of spells that take one or more turns to prepare before they're actually cast, and I suspect that Larian is also considering that.
I think that longer cooldowns for more powerful spells is another good answer. Forktong's objection to that idea is that people could just sit around and wait for them to recharge. I think that if they do so, that's their prerogative, but some people might not want to wait around for 5 real-time minutes (or more) doing nothing. As I already wrote, cooldodwns simply aren't effective outside of combat, especially in a game with a low encounter rate like Original Sin. Dungeons aside, you have plenty of things to do between combats,so longer cooldowns wouldn't effect your habit about ability spam. Furthermore Forktong is right: an easy exploitable system is bad design no mater what. "It's their prerogative" is not an excuse. As for the mana/reagent/whatever management: this is not the most elegant solution to the problem, but it IS A solution, as many good games already proved. I prefer trade-offs, though, because: a) they are interesting mechanics per sé b) they balance combat without adding additional systems to the game. Different casting time for different spell level is an interesting mechanic, really hard to balance though.
Last edited by Baudolino05; 27/12/13 03:48 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
apprentice
|
|
apprentice
Joined: Dec 2013
|
Suspect no more, they actually announced there should be spells with cast time, thus the Willpower stat giving your character resistance to being interrupted. Reagents for spells would be a nice thing, especially in a game where stuff don't respawn out of thin air, making spells a limited ressource. It shouldn't be an inventory problem as there are already auto-sort features, even if they don't work yet. Or one could just carry a pouch in his inventory, reserved for spells reagents. It's an entirely different mechanic than mana, as some reagents can be easier to find than others, whereas mana is universol, cd on your pots or not. It can also provide some interesting interactions with alchemy/crafting. I'm probably biased because I'm more of a warrior/rogue player, but I've seen too many fantasy games where any combat could be solved by spammable "AoEs of Doom". Also, magic doesn't feel so magic when everyone can spam it at will. [...]Point is: How to prevent high level characters from casting exclusively high level spells/abilities? The answer is: "Limiting their use through mechanical features", like the ones I listed in my previous posts. And a second answer could be:"Implementing a feature that prevent low-level abilities to become obsolete".
[...] One solution to keep low level abilities relevant that I've usually seen in mmos, is to give low lvl stuff control/utility, which high tier abilities benefit from. For instance, the low level "Flare" could give a stackable "burning" debuff, and the high level "Fireball" spell damage would be largely dependant on the amount of burning stacks on the target. In the same way, some high tier warrior ability could consume the "snare" or "bleed" stacks of a target to inflict high burst damage. Maybe such "conditions" should be reserved for warrior and ranger abilities though, as they wouldn't rely on reagents.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Jan 2009
|
As I already wrote, cooldodwns simply aren't effective outside of combat, especially in a game with a low encounter rate like Original Sin. Dungeons aside, you have plenty of things to do between combats,so longer cooldowns wouldn't effect your habit about ability spam. Furthermore Forktong is right: an easy exploitable system is bad design no mater what. "It's their prerogative" is not an excuse.
Cooldowns can be made quite long. A round is 6 seconds. A spell with a cooldown of 600 rounds will take a real-time hour's worth of play to wear off. I can't see someone wanting to leave a dungeon after every encounter because they want to use Armageddon on every 10 HP goblin encounter. And no, seriously, reagents suck HARD. It's an obnoxious system on so many levels, ESPECIALLY if they're a limited resource. That will just end up with a system where the high-level spells requiring reagents will NEVER be used, because the mentality is "what if I need this for later?" Simpler to not have super-powered spells in the first place. Or only have those spells as Scrolls, not as spellbooks that you can learn and cast at will. That would function as the same limited resource as reagents would, yes? If reagents are not an unlimited resource, then they'll just become more complex mana potions. They're an inventory problem because you're adding in ANOTHER ton of sh!t into a game that already has a ton of sh!t you can combine with a ton of sh!t. I don't want to have to consult a stupid table every time I find something called "pinch of moth fart" to figure out what good it is, or if I should just toss it. It's STUFF OVERLOAD. Even with the items already in the alpha that I pick up and wander around with, my inventory is full of just stuff that I pick up because of game OCD and have no idea what to do with. I do not want to have to deal with reagents on top of that, especially if I'm not even using a mage.
Last edited by Stabbey; 27/12/13 04:56 PM. Reason: scrolls instead of reagents
|
|
|
|
|
|
apprentice
|
|
apprentice
Joined: Dec 2013
|
Calm down.
Your pro-cd position can be opposed with the exact same arguments: It's so long noone will ever use it.
Well that or it'll be ignored by some "go to homestead - sleep - port back with pyramid" abuse, turning what should be a game mechanic into a minor timesink, rendering the entire thing plain useless. It's fine if you like useless mechanics, after all giving players the illusion of making meaningful choices can be part of game design. But I don't think that kind of thing belongs to combat balance.
It seems your issue is more about the current state of the inventory than the reagents themselvess, and I don't think you should judge it based on its current alpha state. And if you're not using a mage, why pick up reagents to begin with? If you see an item called "sulfur" and its description says "magic reagent", is it really that hard to figure out what it may be used for?
And don't forget the game will be filled with books giving ingame information about everything.
What you hate, others may love. I'm sure for some people it would be very enjoyable to search and sort tons of ingredients for alchemy & spells, then find out their use, if they can be mixed for additionnal effects, etc.
Sure, between the cooldowns, the cast time and the reagents, it may turn magic into quite a complex system, which I actually may myself not enjoy. But I think one shouldn't have to play a "mage" to enjoy the game. Pure warrior, or pure ranger, or hybrid, should be equally viable. One should decide on how to build his character(s) depending on what gameplay he likes, not what is OP/required to progress (eg: you must have fire shield and thus invest in fire sorcery to cross the lava lake and progress through the story).
|
|
|
|
|
|
member
|
|
member
Joined: Jun 2012
|
Cooldowns can be made quite long. A round is 6 seconds. A spell with a cooldown of 600 rounds will take a real-time hour's worth of play to wear off. I can't see someone wanting to leave a dungeon after every encounter because they want to use Armageddon on every 10 HP goblin encounter.
It would be even worst. The system would be equally exploitable trough rest and the developers should make crazy considerations about timing while designing a dungeon or a quest. A per-day limit would be 10 time less problematic. There are better solutions, though. And no, seriously, reagents suck HARD. It's an obnoxious system on so many levels, ESPECIALLY if they're a limited resource. That will just end up with a system where the high-level spells requiring reagents will NEVER be used, because the mentality is "what if I need this for later?" Simpler to not have super-powered spells in the first place. Or only have those spells as Scrolls, not as spellbooks that you can learn and cast at will. That would function as the same limited resource as reagents would, yes?
If reagents are not an unlimited resource, then they'll just become more complex mana potions.
They're an inventory problem because you're adding in ANOTHER ton of sh!t into a game that already has a ton of sh!t you can combine with a ton of sh!t. I don't want to have to consult a stupid table every time I find something called "pinch of moth fart" to figure out what good it is, or if I should just toss it. It's STUFF OVERLOAD. Even with the items already in the alpha that I pick up and wander around with, my inventory is full of just stuff that I pick up because of game OCD and have no idea what to do with. I do not want to have to deal with reagents on top of that, especially if I'm not even using a mage. . This is part of the Ultima-vibe that Original Sin is trying so hard to recreate, and there are bunches of people out there that love it. These are games where you can take, use, combine a shitload of stuff, even if you don't really need to. Is it over-design? Probably, but it's part of the reason because Ultima VII is among the best CRPG ever made. Casting through reagents can work in OS exactly for this reason. You already have lots of reagents in the game; you just need to convert them in a magic resource, and make the high level spells dependent from the rarest ones. As for the "save for later" complex, reagents aren't worse than any other limitation. Cooldown wouldn't change anything in this regard.
Last edited by Baudolino05; 27/12/13 06:02 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Jan 2009
|
I am calm. I'm just emphasizing how much I dislike the idea of a reagent-based system, and why. If you want to limit use of powerful spells by requiring an inventory item, there's already a simpler alternative: high-powered spells can only be found on scrolls, not from spellbooks. That will keep players from using rare scrolls on every pack of crabs, it can't be exploited by resting, and it's less needlessly complex than a reagent-system. You know exactly what the scroll is for, and you only need the scroll, you don't need to hunt down 2-3 rare components to cast the spell. It can even be set to appear only in specific places a limited number of times. Calm down.
Your pro-cd position can be opposed with the exact same arguments: It's so long noone will ever use it.
As for the "save for later" complex, reagents aren't worse than any other limitation. Cooldown wouldn't change anything in this regard.
No, it isn't the same thing. Rare-item reagents say "you can cast this spell up to X times in the entire game, no matter how long you play". Long-cooldown times say "you can only cast this spell X times per game day". If I cast "Bob's Ragent-requiring Nuke" X times in the game, I'll never be able to use it again - ever. If I cast "Dave's cooldown-requiring Zapper" X times a day, I'll either have to make do with what other spells I have, or wait until the cooldown expires, but I will be able to use it again. That's a clear difference.
It would be even worst. The system would be equally exploitable trough rest and the developers should make crazy considerations about timing while designing a dungeon or a quest. A per-day limit would be 10 time less problematic. There are better solutions, though.
A 1-use-per-day spell system is simply a 14,400 turn cooldown, and can be exploited in exactly the same way as a 600 turn cooldown. But yes, there are better solutions.
This is a game where you will end up with an inventory full of stuff no matter how magic works.
Sorry, but that is not an good argument for adding even more.
|
|
|
|
|
|
apprentice
|
|
apprentice
Joined: Dec 2013
|
Having a few rare, forgotten spells only accessible via scrolls would be nice, though I'm not fond of requirements on scrolls. Because without these requirements, your proposition just entirely makes the mage class/tree useless, as one'd better put all his points in warrior stats since he gets all the mage stuff with scrolls.
Also a major difference with regeants is that spells use several different reagents, forcing the player to make a choice between which spells he'll use or which potion he'll craft.
But in the end, it doesn't have to be a binary choice between the complicated version and the dumbed down one, both could be implemented and supplement each other: Player who find it too complicated to understand the system could buy potions or scrolls from vendors, while those who put the time and effort to store the reagents for their spells and craft their own potions would be rewarded for doing so.
|
|
|
|
|
|
member
|
|
member
Joined: Jun 2012
|
A 1-use-per-day spell system is simply a 14,400 turn cooldown, and can be exploited in exactly the same way as a 600 turn cooldown. But yes, there are better solutions.
Except for the fact that in a per day system your are supposed to sleep to regain your spells. It's not just a mater of time. This way developers can control the ability spam through rest areas placement, and at the same time they are free of consideration about timing.
As for the "save for later" complex, reagents aren't worse than any other limitation. Cooldown wouldn't change anything in this regard.
No, it isn't the same thing. Rare-item reagents say "you can cast this spell up to X times in the entire game, no matter how long you play". Long-cooldown times say "you can only cast this spell X times per game day". If I cast "Bob's Ragent-requiring Nuke" X times in the game, I'll never be able to use it again - ever. If I cast "Dave's cooldown-requiring Zapper" X times a day, I'll either have to make do with what other spells I have, or wait until the cooldown expires, but I will be able to use it again. That's a clear difference. Rare reagents just means difficult to find, not limited to a 2 digits number. We are talking of a renewable resource. Just rare, or expansive, or both, not a finite one.
This is a game where you will end up with an inventory full of stuff no matter how magic works.
Sorry, but that is not an good argument for adding even more. And why more, excuse me? In Ultima, for instance, potions and spells use the same base ingredients. Leaving alone the fact that "you don't want to add more stuff in the game" isn't really an argument here, considering that putting an arbitrary limit to the amount of stuff one carries around in this kind of games is - in short - contrary to their spirit.
Last edited by Baudolino05; 27/12/13 08:23 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
