Any game that does spell-casters right?

[TNO]

It seems most RPGs (paper or computer) seem to do one of two things to spell casters.

1) (More common). Make them scale horribly so they are useless at first before turning into demi-gods that outshine anything that doesn't cast spells. See pretty much any game based on 2E or 3E D&D.

2) (Less common). Turn them into archers with particle effects. They are fairly balanced, but frankly uninteresting. See MMOs or Dragon Age (although mages in DA are still OP).

What I would like is some third way that still keeps magic special and powerful, without turning spell-casters into demigods. I think for PnP settings this is simple: change the focus of magic into more of a plot point or of strategic significance than a badly balanced compedium for combat. So mages can still cause earthquakes, teleport around and stuff, but not 4 times a day. Rather each takes a lot of time and prep. Whilst crawling through a dungeon, they can be slightly-sub par fighters with a few tricks up their sleeve rather than soon-to-be-omnipotent glass cannons.

However, I don't see an easy way for this to work in computer games where the 'grand strategy' stuff is taken out of the players hands and the overall tasks dictated to them.

So, codexers, is there another way of doing spell casters which doesn't let them dominate the later game, yet doesn't reduce them to something uninteresting?

 

[jancobblepot]

Ultima 4, 5 and 6 IMO.

But yeah, I have the same question.

 

[Mastermind]

Guild Wars.

 

[SCO]

Right?

POWER, UNLIMITED POWER IS RIGHT. SINK CONTINENTS, SPLIT MOUNTAINS, LEVEL CITIES.

THIS IS WHAT IS BEST IN LIFE!

 

[Volourn]

"1) (More common). Make them scale horribly so they are useless at first before turning into demi-gods that outshine anything that doesn't cast spells. See pretty much any game based on 2E or 3E D&D. "

Bullshit. Mages in D&D are never fukkin' useless.

 

[FinalSonicX]

I think the problem is that game designer often separate the balance of the casters from the mechanics of the rest of the game. People think they can take just the casters from game X and then change them by tweaking their features Y and Z and then they can throw them into their own new game system and expect it to be balanced.

The problem is that you have to design the magic with a mind for what the game is and how it plays. I'm working on my own method of balancing casters and non-casters in P&P so that casters are balanced, but you can't just solve the caster side of the equation and expect acceptable results. You need to look at how you expect each class or role to counter-balance each other and how the mechanics can be equally weighted while introducing a unique magic system separated in some way from the standard combat system.

The best balance for casters I've seen is in roguelikes, since in my experience they are often either below or at the level of power they should be, so they follow the less traditional power curve. Their magic is also interesting. They are still, however, not balanced. With roguelikes though, it can be hard to balance them sometimes because there are usually a wide array of class and race combinations which the developers try to make all viable in one form or another.

So if you're looking for a game with well-balanced casters with unique magic, try looking around for nice mechanical systems first, then narrow your search from there. IMO at least.

 

[FinalSonicX]

Bullshit. Mages in D&D are never fukkin' useless.

at 1st level they can get a sleep spell off, maybe 2 (I don't remember the spell tables off the top of my head). Depending on the number of combatants, their spacing, and how many combats there are in a day before they get a chance to re-memorize, they could potentially be reduced to slinging bullets for the rest of the day.

Even if the number of combats per rest isn't too much to handle, the monsters could make their save (at low levels this isn't too common but it happens sometimes).

Mages can definitely be virtually useless if they get a stroke of bad luck and have a long day ahead of them.

 

[Volourn]

"Even if the number of combats per rest isn't too much to handle, the monsters could make their save (at low levels this isn't too common but it happens sometimes). "

There is no saving through for sleep in 2E and IIRC none in 3E either. It effects low level chaarcters automatically based on HD.

Mages are no more sueless than warriors and their silly thaco/sattack bonuses.

A mage could end a fight against a DOZEN kobolds with 1 spell. GL having your level 1 warrior win that fight.

A level 1 mage can defeat a high level warrior as well with one spell. GL having your level 1 warrior win that battle.

R00fles!

 

[Malakal]

LOL using sleep at level 1 mage in D&D shows your horrible ineptitude at powergaming. Try color spray: 2 HD or less is unconscious, blinded, and stunned for 2d4 rounds, then blinded and stunned for 1d4 rounds, and then stunned for 1 round. AND its AOE. Good fucking bye all CR equivalent threats. Sorcerer can cast this spell 3 times on level one, thats 3 encounters cleared (Coup de Grace'd) or 3 level up to 2 fighters dead (how about comparing low level PCs now huh?). D&D is mage extravaganza extraordinaire.

Its hard to balance magic. Its either an ability that redefines reality (ie magic) or colored arrows (ie magic archery). I actually think that 2ED does this well with different experience requirements for classes, at least they do not pretend that non magic classes are equal...

Of course adding interesting spellcasting system could change this, if magic was dangerous perhaps players wouldnt simply cast cast cast. But I dont really remember a single game like that.

 

[Excidium]

Of course adding interesting spellcasting system could change this, if magic was dangerous perhaps players wouldnt simply cast cast cast. But I dont really remember a single game like that.

Mage: The Ascension did that right with the paradox rules.

I can't remember a single cRPG where magic can't be abused though...

 

[SCO]

Aleshar: world of ice.

 

[circ]

I don't think mages scale that shit in D&D. They start out as vulnerable spellcasters, and end up as vulnerable spellcasters. They don't have the immunities or resistances of paladins, atleast not at the same time. They're worthless in melee. Once they're out of spells, they're just plain worthless. And even when they have spells, wow, you can clear a room full of kobolds with one fireball, amazing. Multiple spellcasters can walk over a lot of things, but so can warriors with the right kit.

 

[Mrowak]

"Even if the number of combats per rest isn't too much to handle, the monsters could make their save (at low levels this isn't too common but it happens sometimes). "

There is no saving through for sleep in 2E and IIRC none in 3E either. It effects low level chaarcters automatically based on HD.

Mages are no more sueless than warriors and their silly thaco/sattack bonuses.

A mage could end a fight against a DOZEN kobolds with 1 spell. GL having your level 1 warrior win that fight.

A level 1 mage can defeat a high level warrior as well with one spell. GL having your level 1 warrior win that battle.

R00fles!

First time ever I agree with Volorun. Wizards at 1st level are not useless at all in D&D - though they are in games like Baldur's Gate. Only ToEE managed to put it right. Especially the Enchantment, Illusion and Necromancy schools are of great use - they can off multiple weak/single strong oponents from battle just like that. Add to that ability to scribe spell scrolls and you have very versatile character.

Volly is wrong in saying that sleep does not require save - I don't know about 2ed but in 3ed all living creatures can make save against will normally, regardless of their level.

About other games where mages are better balanced:

Certainly Realms of Arcania series. Wizards are a must for the success but they will never become omnipotent artilery platform. They have plenty of utility spells, can heal wounds and will assist in combat but they can't do everything. Actually, having one wizard and another wizard/warrior class (eg. an elf) is enough. That reminds me, I really must finish Shadow over Rive one day.

Betrayal at Krondor - wizards are extrmely powerful but have three major obstacles barring them from gaining the ultimate power. 1). They can't cast spells in battle when there's an enemy on adjacent square (there is a very expensive item that remedies that) 2). Wizards use up hp to cast each spell - the more spells they cast the more vulnerable they become. Also, the fact in BaK the lower your hp is the lower your your abilities become (including spellcasting, as well as defence) does make magician's life more difficult. 3)You need to find/buy spells yourself. No "learning as you level-up" nonsense. In order to become arcane master you must explore the world around, prove your skill, finish complex quests etc. How I miss this element in modern day magic-systems.

 

[Spark Mandriller]

There is no saving through for sleep in 2E and IIRC none in 3E either. It effects low level chaarcters automatically based on HD.

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/sleep.htm

Sleep
Enchantment (Compulsion) [Mind-Affecting]
Saving Throw: Will negates

There are way too many broken as fuck spells in 3.5, but even WotC weren't dumb enough to put a no save just lose spell in at level 1.

 

[Captain Shrek]

I don't think mages scale that shit in D&D. They start out as vulnerable spellcasters, and end up as vulnerable spellcasters. They don't have the immunities or resistances of paladins, atleast not at the same time. They're worthless in melee. Once they're out of spells, they're just plain worthless. And even when they have spells, wow, you can clear a room full of kobolds with one fireball, amazing. Multiple spellcasters can walk over a lot of things, but so can warriors with the right kit.

Have you actually ever played DnD?

They are THE MOST POWERFUL CLASS EVAR. Deal with it. Wail of banshee. Everyone deaaaad!

 

[FinalSonicX]

There is no saving through for sleep in 2E and IIRC none in 3E either. It effects low level chaarcters automatically based on HD.

Mages are no more sueless than warriors and their silly thaco/sattack bonuses.

A mage could end a fight against a DOZEN kobolds with 1 spell. GL having your level 1 warrior win that fight.

A level 1 mage can defeat a high level warrior as well with one spell. GL having your level 1 warrior win that battle.

I went and looked up the spells in my 2e and 3.5 phb and you're right in that 2nd edition sleep has no saving throw. So now you've finished off around 8 kobolds on average (2d4 HD). A good DM will mix up the encounter to include creatures of multiple types and with differing HD so that the big tough monster such as the ogre is left alive, so that the rest of the party needs to get involved to prevent the wizard from being pounded into a fine red mist.

In 3rd edition, there is a will saving throw to negate the effect, and it only affects 4 HD of creatures (it's non-variable). In both 2nd and 3rd edition, you can manually awaken sleeping creatures by slapping them (a full round in 2nd, a standard in 3rd which is even more lenient), so if the monsters have teammates up, then the DM can ensure that any important creatures that get knocked out by the spell are not out of the fight for long.

If you're seriously implying that a 1st level wizard can beat a high level fighter, I'm not certain what you're talking about really. The spell only affects 2d4 HD of creatures, and any creatures with 4+3 HD are not affected at all. In 3rd, there's a saving throw involved in addition.

A level 1 wizard can take on a maximum of 16 kobolds (on a max roll), or an average of 8 kobolds. in 3rd, it's 8 kobolds (IIRC they're still CR 1/2). Just for clarity.

A fighter isn't useless because if they've got decent gear then they have pretty decent thaco/BAB, AC, and damage that can be repeated consistently round after round. They're much more survivable than a wizard when delving into a dungeon, especially with a good DM who knows how to push wizards hard and make them work at it to survive. Can the wizard resolve unique situations normal fighters could not? Yes, but then again that's often their purpose. They alter reality to make things work for them.

Now let's go back to the real world here and have a 1st level wizard. They have 1 or maybe 2 1st level spells at their disposal. That means 1 or 2 sleeps or color sprays, then they're down to their sling. Given a halfway decent DM, they're not going to let the Wizard dictate the pace of the game and decide when they rest so they can be effective again. The DM is going to have varied encounters with varied monster types in situations that necessitate the rest of the party's involvement or else the wizard will die. Otherwise the game is all about following the wizard around as he declares victory over the monsters. It's not that simple when you're playing with a competent DM.

As for color spray, there's the 2e and 3e version. in 2e there may or may not be a saving throw (depending on the target HD), and regardless it only affects 1d6 creatures starting from the closest creature. With the right dungeon layout and proper encounter design, the DM can ensure that the color spray can never end a battle then and there. in 3e there's a will save but it's arguably more powerful. It affects creatures with 2 HD or less the most, but a competent DM will once again account for this and ensure that creatures he wants to stay effective have a certain minimum HD, and then fill out the rest of the encounter with swarms of other nasties and a few other types potentially to mix things up. And again, a good DM won't let the player dictate the pace of the game by simply declaring that they return to town to rest and it is so, they make certain that parties who push themselves to their limits or abuse the wizard's spells/day pay the price.

Wizards are effective for the battles that they choose to use their limited spells in. Otherwise, they're mostly useless in combat.

 

[Yeesh]

Back when I played D&D PC games, a level one magic user got 1-4 hit points and couldn't wear armor. You'd be making a lot of assumptions to say he could take down a pack of anything.

 

[Spark Mandriller]

Have you actually ever played DnD?

They are THE MOST POWERFUL CLASS EVAR. Deal with it. Wail of banshee. Everyone deaaaad!

You can do better than Wail of the Banshee if you're capable of level 9 spells. Use shit like meta'd Enervations/ranged Irresistable Dances or Shivering Touches/Disjuction on gear reliant enemies/Forcecage on non casters/mailman style Orbs, just fuck people up without giving them a save. No point letting them defend themselves if you don't have to.

 

[Overweight Manatee]

Guild W...

Guild Wars.

Damn

And here's the proof.

This. Its really amazing that the average RPG has combat so horrible that just making a half decent combat system up on your own is basically enough to hold a game up.

 

[Volourn]

"Of course adding interesting spellcasting system could change this, if magic was dangerous perhaps players wouldnt simply cast cast cast. But I dont really remember a single game like that."

d&D has rules for this as well. It's not new or unique.

"If you're seriously implying that a 1st level wizard can beat a high level fighter, I'm not certain what you're talking about really."

You do realize that there are other 1st level spells other than sleep, right?


"so that the big tough monster such as the ogre is left alive, "

Unless your DM just wants to mass murder the party the chances of facing an ogre striaght up at level 1 is retarted since an ogre can kill a level 1 fighter in 1 round.

Plus, we're talking about comapring classes here. A level fighter has less chance to beat an ogre 1 on 1 just like the level 1 mage but the mage has a decent shot at it.


"A fighter isn't useless because if they've got decent gear then they have pretty decent thaco/BAB, AC, and damage that can be repeated consistently round after round. "

"Level 1 characters are known to be poor. GL getting anything better than chainmail. No matter how high or ac is, those kobolds are gonna whittle down your hp.
Now let's go back to the real world here and have a 1st level wizard. They have 1 or maybe 2 1st level spells at their disposal. That means 1 or 2 sleeps or color sprays, then they're down to their sling. Given a halfway decent DM, they're not going to let the Wizard dictate the pace of the game and decide when they rest so they can be effective again. The DM is going to have varied encounters with varied monster types in situations that necessitate the rest of the party's involvement or else the wizard will die. Otherwise the game is all about following the wizard around as he declares victory over the monsters. It's not that simple when you're playing with a competent DM.

As for color spray, there's the 2e and 3e version. in 2e there may or may not be a saving throw (depending on the target HD), and regardless it only affects 1d6 creatures starting from the closest creature. With the right dungeon layout and proper encounter design, the DM can ensure that the color spray can never end a battle then and there. in 3e there's a will save but it's arguably more powerful. It affects creatures with 2 HD or less the most, but a competent DM will once again account for this and ensure that creatures he wants to stay effective have a certain minimum HD, and then fill out the rest of the encounter with swarms of other nasties and a few other types potentially to mix things up. And again, a good DM won't let the player dictate the pace of the game by simply declaring that they return to town to rest and it is so, they make certain that parties who push themselves to their limits or abuse the wizard's spells/day pay the price. "

So, basically, your way of making the level 1 wizard more sucky than the warrior is , as the dm, to make sure every situation is anti mage? That's retarted. I could do the same thing with making things anti warrior. LMFAO

 

[FinalSonicX]

You do realize that there are other 1st level spells other than sleep, right?

And which spell is it that allows a 1st level wizard to beat a high level fighter? Charm Person? Explain.

Unless your DM just wants to mass murder the party the chances of facing an ogre straight up at level 1 is retarted since an ogre can kill a level 1 fighter in 1 round.

Plus, we're talking about comapring classes here. A level fighter has less chance to beat an ogre 1 on 1 just like the level 1 mage but the mage has a decent shot at it.

It need not be a literal ogre, the point is that you present bigger threats that require the party to work together to take down that cannot be taken down easily by the wizard. Otherwise the purpose of playing a role-playing game is meaningless.

As for comparing classes, fighters can perform consistently over a period of time with decent survivability in the kinds of situations adventurers often find themselves caught in - triggering traps, surprised by monsters, swarmed on multiple sides, etc. The wizard picks his time to shine at low levels and then he's done for the day for the most part. At the very least you must recognize this. Any competent DM will not allow the wizard to simply declare the day over and sleep restfully without the potential for wandering monsters, random encounters, or flanking groups to come into play. Perhaps their normal path out of the dungeon is blocked. There are plenty of creative ways for a DM to provide lots of fun for the party at lower levels without letting the wizard dominate nor letting him shine too brightly.

"Level 1 characters are known to be poor. GL getting anything better than chainmail. No matter how high or ac is, those kobolds are gonna whittle down your hp.

It's a hell of a lot better than no armor and 4 hp. The warrior stands a chance of fighting and surviving in a surprise scenario or in a reasonably sized battle. The wizard is in some serious trouble if they're surprised, lose initiative, or the party just gets caught in a string of bad luck. The fighter is less vulnerable to being dominated in one round due to his hp and armor. His consistent damage output allows him to win a battle even if he has a round or two of bad luck.

So, basically, your way of making the level 1 wizard more sucky than the warrior is , as the dm, to make sure every situation is anti mage? That's retarted. I could do the same thing with making things anti warrior. LMFAO

My solution is to present scenarios that cannot be simply steamrolled by a wizard. Otherwise, why are the other non-wizard players bothering to play? Why bother with combat if it's as simple as the wizard casting sleep on every room he walks into? The idea of a Role-playing game, as I'm sure you're well aware, is for each member of the party to fulfill a role. By negating the purpose of just about every other character in combat, the wizard when left unchecked will reduce fun for the whole group. Being a creative and thoughtful DM eliminates many of the problems sleep and other spells pose, and it makes wizards mostly useless at the beginning (because 90% of the time they cannot or should not be doing something terribly useful in combat). This is supposedly "balanced" by their exponential power growth as the game goes on.

Being a DM is all about coming up with new ways to foil the magic players attempt to use to get around having to deal with problems. Magic can bend reality, and as the representative of reality (the DM), it's your job to resist it in reasonable ways to challenge players and provide fun for them.

This isn't being anti-mage per se as the DM, it's being anti player abuse. If the thief/rogue or fighter or druid are outshining the party or being too useful compared to the rest of the party (hogging the spotlight or diminishing fun for the others), then the DM needs to design his encounters to make the other players feel useful again. As a fighter, it's no fun if the wizard just declares victory in each encounter since, as a fighter, it's your entire character concept to go and fight things at some point. If the DM is being held hostage by the wizard, then he's doing it wrong. Sorry.

 

[Volourn]

You are an idiot. The thread was about how 'useless' the mage is at level 1. All I was pointing out that the wizard is far from useless at level 1. Nowehre did I claim a level 1 mage should be able to do everything by himself as no DM should allow any class to do that. FFS

The point is a level 1 mage is just as useful as a level 1 warrior. The point is for the aprty to work together. Hell, a DM can make a situation where a level rogue is the most useful member in the party by using a bunch of traps, locked doors that are too strong to bash down and need their locks picked, to pick pocket an important item from an npc needed to complete the mission, etc., etc.

FFS FFS FFS

 

[FinalSonicX]

and my point is that saying mages are useless at level 1 is mostly true, since 90% of the time they're not making meaningful choices in combat, and a good DM ensures this (as well as the rules through spells/day). mages aren't terribly useful at level 1 combat, that's pretty much just the way it is. The fighter is virtually always making meaningful choices in combat. That's the point.

Call me an idiot if you'd like but there's no denying it that people who play wizards with a decent DM spend most of their time in combat slinging mostly useless sling bullets or running away from threats until they get some levels.

You're correct though, they're not LITERALLY useless in combat. just mostly useless.

 

[TNO]

The thread was about how 'useless' the mage is at level 1.

Bullshit. This thread is about balancing mages. So all this arguing from you about how mages aren't useless early on is frankly irrelevant - either way, it is not in doubt they get preposterously OP at mid level on up. This is a bad thing.

 

[Nex]

Make spells need regents which are not abundant.