Why Does Magic Suck?

[minispike47]

I think that magic isn't too hard for new players, although in all games there must be a learning curve. I think that, for instance Dragon Age Origins coupled accessablity with depth. With DA:O the linear spell progession would not confuse new players but would still allow some specialisation.
Fable 3 took this too far in the direction of accessablity and made a very shallow system.

 

[Jamboxdotcom]

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/LinearWarriorsQuadraticWizards

Mages only suck at low levels. Once they're fully-trained, they usually wipe the floor with everything else. There's no need to balance them for starting players - the min-maxers will find their way to the mages eventually.

dang, beat me to it! also, OT, i'd have to say that being "more complicated" doesn't necessarily equate to "more difficult". if anything, the biggest challenge i've ever had playing a mage is the whole glass cannon issue.

 

[hailfire]

I hate to sound elitist here, but it actually makes more sense to have a complicated magic system to figure out. if magic wielders are wandering around everywhere than magic ceases to be special, it's just a shiney-er way to kill someone. however, if the magic system is a complex jumble of talent trees and unique skills, than only players who are creative, clever and patient can choose mage. if we make every video game easy, we lose the overall feeling of acomplishment we get from winning.

 

[Physics Engine]

I always considered Mages to be the "Hard" option, while Rogues were "Normal" and Warriors "Easy" (this is of course painted with a broad brush, ymmv).

For most RPG's that give you an option for character class I'd start with a Warrior and plow through the game like a lawn mower. Then on another playthrough, go Rogue for some more difficulty, then Mage once I've figured out the leveling and spell casting systems for some added early-game challenge.

Then again, I usually start out an RPG as a Warrior, then stop and re-roll a few chars once I have the hang of the game. For some reason I can never make the character I like right off the bat... maybe that's why I see classes as difficulty sliders in most RPGs, hmm.

 

[Continuity]

I think that magic isn't too hard for new players, although in all games there must be a learning curve. I think that, for instance Dragon Age Origins coupled accessablity with depth. With DA:O the linear spell progession would not confuse new players but would still allow some specialisation.
Fable 3 took this too far in the direction of accessablity and made a very shallow system.

Well... IMO, and i'm sure i'm not alone here, DAO was too shallow in the magic department. When you compare it side by side with games like baldurs gate 2 and the NWN series you can really see its short commings on the complexity and depth side.

 

[Atmos Duality]

Isn't this topic a bit broad to be making a blanket statement?

I can name several games where Magic starts out very strong and stays that way, or starts out amazing and then other avenues of attack/defense play "catch-up" later.

 

[manaman]

How can we make Magic in RPGs more accessible to new players?

You should start by assumeing new players aren't total morons.

I mean I've not seen a spell system in a major RPG in the past 5 years that took more than a few seconds to figure out.

Maybe if you're still playing Ultima Underworld where you needed to decode the games magical language to construct spells then yes that might need simplifying but most modern games have accessable magic systems.

The only real problem there is that you have to do a bit of experimenting. Anything DnD based aside, there can be a bit of a learning curve to find which spells and abilities are the most effective in any new game.

I think the real problem the op is trying to point out is that the effective builds for mages in most RPGs do not usually exceed then number of builds for other classes. Yet they try to cram in so many optionss that you are left with hundreds or thousands of less then effective possible builds. While other classes with less options are more open to experimentation with less negative consequences down the road.

I should point out that as an avid DnD fan I don't really agree with simplifying so much as balancing.

 

[RyQ_TMC]

I always found the biggest problem with Mage classes is that they're great when you're really high level and can rain down supernatural death on your enemies, but getting to that point is virtually impossible because when you just start out as a mage you can barely cast a fireball (and even than only like once per battle in the case of the DnD games) spell and all your enemies are fighters or rouges so they prone to running up and chopping your balls off, and since Mages always have piss poor melee skills, you always die really fast.

Exemplified best in Majesty (yeah, I know, not really an RPG). First level wizards would get killed by a nibble from a rat on their way to the marketplace, and if they started a fight with just about anything, you'd better hoped there was another hero nearby to tank for them. Then they got Fire Shield at level 3... Once they hit level 7, they were formidable heroes, and beyond level 10, they could easily solo waves of dragons. So the 5000+ GP total investment in mages always paid off in the end...

By the game's standards, you are a God.

And since it's Baldur's Gate, you don't even need to be a mage for that! (see what I did there?)

OT: I'm for keeping mage the complex class. Having to choose what specialization/spell to invest in, having to balance defensive and offensive magic, that's what makes the class interesting to play. However, any game which has a complex magic system but lacks active pause is a crime. "A horde of goblins? Hah, that's easy, I'll just click 800 buttons to set up my goblin-killing set of spells... Wait, don't charge at me yetOHSHITOHSHITOHSHITOHSHI-"

 

[godfist88]

easy just simplify their list of moves.

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

Uhm....Cleric/Priest class? Pet Class..

The Holy Trinity is Meatshield, Healbot and DPS.

If you really want an interesting magic system, go back to Jack Vance, who basically created the "modern" version.

Or read The Laundry Series (Cybermagic), Dresden Files (Modern Chemistry), Mage (Coincidental).

In games, Vampire (Blood=Mana), Arcanum (Tech/Mages), or even Star Wars...Tell me the Force isn't Magic.

 

[LordPsychodin]

I'd honestly take tougher casters with a dragon age /4th edition D&D style casting system any day of the week. Powerful can be balanced right from early on when done right, the problem is terrible designers are more willing to reuse and evoke tropes than innovate the design of the mage after all this time save for a few sources because they don't want to dare have the idea that a high level warrior is as big a problem to the mage as the mage is to the warrior, when they absolutely should be.

 

[Canadamus Prime]

I will say I do prefer the magic systems where I have a mana pool (or a set amount of MP) and I can cast as many spells as I want as many times as I want until I run out of mana, and I can restore mana with potions and whatever. 'Cause that's one thing that bugged me about the D'n'D based games like Neverwinter Nights, whenever I tried to play as a mage I found I couldn't get very far because I could only cast my spells once per day and as soon as I ran out of spells, I was screwed. Of course it's a non-issue when you're like level 20 and have like 30 spells to choose from. "Oh no, I already used the fireball spell, I'll just use the Giant-Laser-Beam-Face-Melty-Death spell instead."

 

[s0m3th1ng]

By the game's standards, you are a God.

And since it's Baldur's Gate, you don't even need to be a mage for that! (see what I did there?)

Well played sir...

 

[More Fun To Compute]

I think that it is wrong to think that fighters and magic men should be equally easy to play. Fighters should just concentrate on hitting things and I think that too many modern RPGs overcomplicate this with too many fancy special attacks and abilities which are not tactically interesting or seem magical themselves. What a fighter needs to do is hit someone with a weapon so they die. Magic men on the other hand should have a huge complicated toolkit of spells to do things that vary from almost never useful to so effective that they kill everyone, enemy or not, within a large area of effect. A magic man should be someone you have on your team then never want them to do anything ever unless you are really desperate.

The Laundry novels, as suggested, are a good example of this. Computational demonology is the sort of magic you wouldn't spam by mashing an A button but I suppose that something awesome might happen if you try.

 

[J-meMalone]

My problem is that mages aren't too complicated, it's that they're complicated COMPARED to other classes.

Take DA:O for example (I haven't played awakening so I don't know about what was added there):
Warrior specialisations grant a choice of:
A damage boost.
An ability to slightly debuff enemies in melee.
Gain slight buffs from dead enemies (which didn't work).
A boost to magic resistance.

Rogue specialisations grant a choice of:
A bonus to backstab damage.
Passive stat bonuses for the party.
The ability to summon a pet (which you have no control of).
More accurate atacks.

Mage specialisations grant a choice of:
The ability to use their magic stat to determine what armor they can wear, as well as the damage dealt with weapons.
The ability to use health instead of mana to cast spells, as well as some of the best crowd control spells in the game.
Shapeshifting.
A boost to healing.

As you may be able to tell, the warrior and rogue's choices change very little, while three out of four of the mage's choices can drastically change change how they play.

 

[51gunner]

Speaking in really broad terms, it's because of the fundamental philosophy of how each class deals with the inevitable swarm of enemies attempting to kill you (in a solo setting).

Warrior: "Hey, I'm supposed to take damage!"
Rogue: "Well, I'm pretty agile and can probably dodge & incapacitate you."
Mage: "The words 'glass cannon' are the bane of my existence."

With it being solo games that I think are the topic here, all classes must have the ability to kill the enemies sometime within a reasonable length of time. Because of this, the 'low damage' warrior still has to deal moderate amounts of damage so players don't get bored of 30 minute boss fights. On the flip side, the mage's damage can't be *that* much higher than the warrior's, otherwise you have five second boss fights where you have to dodge a maximum of two attacks.

MMOs can sidestep this somewhat by having damage-absorbers be largely reliant on damage dealers and vice-versa, but single-player RPG's don't have this luxury.

 

[FalloutJack]

Why Does Magic Suck?

It doesn't. The power to blow shit up is usually my first choice. As the size of an explosion increases, the number of social situations it is incapable of solving approaches zero.

And that would be wrong.

 

[p3t3r]

make preset mage build advice things. for example if you wanted to make a blasty fire mage they could highlight effective paths, not the most effective but enough to give the general idea

 

[The3rdEye]

If someone can figure out that being behind someone as a rogue or using a 2H/dual wield weapons as a warrior is a great way to deal damage, they'll figure out that Fireball is incredibly effective at making things dead.

Similarly, if they can figure out that having a high dodging skill or high armor class is a great way to minimize damage, they'll figure out that Mana Shield/Mage Armor are god sends and if they're really good they'll figure out how CC and stuns. All the tools are there, it's just up to the player to figure out how to use them like any other class. It's just not something built to play LIKE a warrior, even though they can serve similar purposes.