Trait idea for mages:

Brainstorm ideas of possible additions to the game. Read this before posting!

Moderator: Forum Moderators

Forum rules
Before posting a new idea, you must read the following:
Post Reply
User avatar
Jetrel
Posts: 7242
Joined: February 23rd, 2004, 3:36 am
Location: Midwest US

Trait idea for mages:

Post by Jetrel »

Not sure what you'd call it. "Adept" might work. "Quick-witted," perhaps.

This applies only to users of offensive magic.
Basically, it reduces damage on their magic attacks by a small amount (20-30%).
In return, though, the unit gets an additional strike on their magic attack.

Rough example:
A mage deals 7-3.
A quick-witted mage deals 5-4 or 6-4.
A red mage deals 8-4.
A quick-witted red mage deals 6-5.
A dark adept deals 10-2.
A quick-witted dark adept deals 7-3.


It can be engineered (through an appropriate sizing of the damage reduction) to control the unit's potential for damage relative to an ordinary unit. It might want for a slightly higher damage potential, or it might want for a slightly lower one - depends on how alluring it would be, though I imagine it would be no more so than dextrous.

The important fallout of the trait:
• It is a disadvantage in that the unit deals less damage on its first strike, and might not be able to make a kill. Bad when a wounded mage is attacking a 7-hp archer.

•It is an advantage in that the unit deals an additional strike, and thus has a better chance of hitting the enemy (especially relevant with, say, dark adepts). Good when a non-wounded mage is attacking a 5-hp unit.
ott
Inactive Developer
Posts: 838
Joined: September 28th, 2004, 10:20 am

Post by ott »

This would be a huge pain to balance, since damage interacts with time of day or leadership bonuses and rounding in some very non-intuitive ways, and there are thousands of combinations to examine.
This quote is not attributable to Antoine de Saint-Exupéry.
Attila
Posts: 243
Joined: January 29th, 2005, 7:17 pm

Re: Trait idea for mages:

Post by Attila »

Jetryl wrote:•It is an advantage in that the unit deals an additional strike, and thus has a better chance of hitting the enemy (especially relevant with, say, dark adepts). Good when a non-wounded mage is attacking a 5-hp unit.
Isn't the point of using an offensive mage instead of an archer because they are very likely to hit, and already have a 70% chance of hitting.
User avatar
Elvish_Pillager
Posts: 8129
Joined: May 28th, 2004, 10:21 am
Location: Everywhere you think, nowhere you can possibly imagine.
Contact:

Post by Elvish_Pillager »

Your quick-witted Red Mage deals less damage than a normal Red Mage!
It's all fun and games until someone loses a lawsuit. Oh, and by the way, sending me private messages won't work. :/ If you must contact me, there's an e-mail address listed on the website in my profile.
DavidByron
Posts: 72
Joined: July 10th, 2005, 6:30 am

Post by DavidByron »

It's a nice concept. I think you ought to just have the extra attack as a choice. On attack you'd have the choice of the two attacks. On defence I guess it would be the normal one each time.

It wouldn't have to be for mages, although it makes a lot of sense that a mage's attack could be more flexible. But a "one mighty blow" deal makes sense for melee too.

The new attack is based on the old one - more or less same damage - but either has less or more "dice". For fighters maybe allow it all to go into one "mighty blow" which would be great against non-firststrike opponents, unless you're slowed. For mages - you know one attack's still nicer. But different traits could go either way.

Nice concept.
DavidByron
Posts: 72
Joined: July 10th, 2005, 6:30 am

Post by DavidByron »

That last post was a bit hard to understand because I was in a hurry!

Instead of adding one to the damage number, as happens with the strength trait you're suggesting adding one to the dice number. Usually the dice number is smaller so you're forfeiting the +2 HP. And you're also suggesting making the attack number smaller for balance.

Generally having your damage in a smaller number of dice is better so long as it multiplies to the same amount. It makes no difference if you and the opponent unit are so healthy no one will die. But if you or the enemy are about to die then you want to get your damage in as few dice as possible.

By contrast the times when you want more dice are limited:

(1) when you have a slow or stone attack and you're more interested in maximizing the chances of the effect going off than doing damage. For example a shaman.

(2) as you mention, when you are attacking some nearly dead unit that you want to make sure and hit.

So I think because the modification might make the Mage weaker you should make it a choice between the original stats and the new one. You can just have both on the unit profile. A 7-3 and a 6-4 say. I do think it would be hard to get balance in a formulaic way as the strength trait does (+1 damage) because some attacks are something like 17-2 or 14-4 where adding an extra dice is huge and others are more like 3-3 or 5-4 where adding a dice is nothing.

Also for a magic attack you could just have a trait which alters the probability of hitting because you know it's always 70% normally and you don't have to worry about overpowered combinations. If you want a more "sure thing" a magical attack is best suited for it because it's already intended to be like that. So you could drop a dice and say the remaining attacks always hit 100%. Again make this an optional attack. You have a choice of a 7-3 magic attack and a 7-2 "always hits" attack.

For melee I think you'd want a trait that allowed a "crushing blow" of one dice. Same to chance to hit as ever. For example an orc with 10-3 could make one attack at 30-1 instead. Same damage but very useful. Perhaps that's a bit much though. Maybe a little less than 30, maybe 25-1. Anyway making it an additional attack and giving you a choice (I believe this is true?) would mean that for defence you use the ordinary 10-3, so you couldn't one hit kill people as a defender, only as the attacker.

So long as these additional attack choices were basically the same as the original unit had (ie the same damage type, same ability) they seem like traits more than, say, alternative unit designs.

Possibly you could go so far as to actually change the damage type of the attack if it was one that the unit already had. For example the Dwarvish Steelclad has a blade attack of 10-3 and an impact of 13-2. As a trait you might have a "hammer specialist" Steelclad who had these 2 attacks swapped around so the 10-3 was a hammer and the 13-2 was the axe. That's a pretty subtle change. Could be a trait but it's verging on being a new (very similar) unit.
Post Reply