Baldur's Gate Baldur's Gate 3 Pre-Release Thread [EARLY ACCESS RELEASED, GO TO NEW THREAD]

[Silly Germans]

The solution to how conserved spell casting is, is quite simple. Give players their 2nd Edition awesome spells. Let them cast them as much as they want. Place an appropriate drawback proportionate to the value of the spell. I have a homebrew RPG where consequences range from the spell merely fizzling, to violently detonating the caster, and much much more. Gives the player freedom, no resting drudgery, but enforces discipline to bring force proportionate to the challenge. It also introduces lots of fun mechanics, as well as giving a rational reason why the world isn't awash in "easy-button Harry Potter grade" magic. Mundane skills also become a lot more practical. Do you cast 'Knock' on that lock when it could possibly make your entire party go insane, or do you break out the lockpick tools?

You don't play them newfangled vidyagames very often, do you?

I don't see much difference between "cast X times per rest", "cast X times per encounter", a cooldown and something like mana you replenish by resting/drinking mixtures. It's all amounts to the same: restricting you from using certain abilities/spells too much in too short window of time. Or do you mean to say that cooldowns are the least restrictive, therefore they are the lamest resolution for restricting the overuse of certain spells/abilities?

Let me spell it out for you:

• With resource based casting you can cast the same, even powerful spell multiple times in quick succession if you have resources for that. That means, among other things, that other combatants are not automatically safe for X turns after one gets finger of death cast on them.
• With resource based casting casting one spell depletes your resource for others so you need to weigh your spells carefully rather than cycling between your several most powerful nukes until combat is resolved.
• Cooldown system is by far the most horribly unnatural and game-y system imaginable, because with few, rare exceptions it's pretty much impossible to justify in fluff.

And finally - whatever you can accomplish with cooldowns you can accomplish with casting times, in addition to a bunch of other things:

• Casting times are very natural concept - a wizard needs time for their waving hands and speaking gibberish with high-budget electronically enhanced voice and accompanying light show, presumably the more time the more impressive the end effect is going to be.
  
• With casting times you need to commit well in advance of getting desired effects. That enforces tactical thinking and balances powerful abilities.
• With casting times defending side has options besides tanking that fireball. That means that spells don't have to be nerfed, and encumbered by save-or-die that frequently have the outcome of the entire battle hinging on a single roll, just to have them straddle the thin line between cheese and uselessness. That in turn means the spells can be much more powerful and reliable - you now can have this spell that reanimates skeletons while still inside living enemies and has them climb out and it won't necessarily be hilariously broken even if it doesn't fail 99% of the time.
• Conversely, because the defending side can and will act to prevent being hit by spells attacker needs to protect their casters against death or interruption and prevent enemy from taking effective cover instead of spells just being fire-and-forget nukes.
• Finally, because of powerful spells not relying on non-determinism and unreliability for balancing, the game is much less broken by even non-restrictive save-load meta-mechanics.
• Casting times are even more restrictive than cooldowns - even though you also get to cast given spell at most once per X turns, you additionally get an X turns delay before first casting, have to commit in advance and cannot cast your other spells during casting time.

Its not like you cant use them together. D:OS2 has source points and cooldowns and i don't think the game would be better if it only had some sort of mana as resource.
You'd end up spamming meteor shower, hail storm, etc, if they weren't limited by a cooldown. Cooldowns as a limiting property do work and can work with other mechanics,
i see no benefit in limiting the mechanics by excluding cooldowns per se. I also like casting times or channeling/interruption mechanics, but they also do not exclude cooldowns
and could be used side by side. They are actually very intiuitive to use together since it makes you even more careful about using your spells at the right time instead of simply
spamming them, knowing that you won't be able to use your best spell anytime soon again if you are interrupted.

The fluff point is moot and purely subjective. There are already so many game-y systems anyways, cooldowns aren't any worse or harder to explain if you wish to do so.
Take turn based combat itself as example, that is as game-y as it gets without any logical explanation whatsoever. If you can accept that in a game, how can you have
problems with cooldowns ? Just take them as part of the game mechanics.

 

[Lacrymas]

There is nothing intuitive about cooldowns. And there is nothing more limiting than casting times. Imagine having a 3 round casting time, you won't be clamoring for the cooldowns any time soon in that context.

 

[Cryomancer]

Imagine having a 3 round casting time

There are a lot of spells that require so long casting time that are not useful on combat. On 5e, animate dead is useless in combat since it takes 10 rounds(1 minute) to be cast. On Vampire, The Masquarede, Tremere received a huge nerf on their most recent edition, a lot of powerful thaumaturgy abilities are now rituals.

Take turn based combat itself as example, that is as game-y as it gets without any logical explanation whatsoever.

Turn based is a abstraction. Reaction, free action, bonus action(...) is just abstractions

--------------------

I really miss when "RPG elements" was stats measuring your character capabilities, armor class, skill levels, etc; and not cooldowns, stat stickie gear, number inflation, etc

 

[Harthwain]

Cooldown system is by far the most horribly unnatural and game-y system imaginable, because with few, rare exceptions it's pretty much impossible to justify in fluff.

Does it need to be justified in fluff though? I find it working well within the system you're creating it for being far more important consideration. Was lore ever important when it came to any Baldur's Gate game? Or any cRPG game with magic? Death Gate had its magic explained, but that's because how it worked was very important part of the game (both in fluff and out of fluff), but that was an adventure game with a fixed storyline/progression, which is an entirely different animal.

And finally - whatever you can accomplish with cooldowns you can accomplish with casting times, in addition to a bunch of other things:

Question: Cooldowns and casting times don't have to be mutually exclusive, do they?

• With resource based casting casting one spell depletes your resource for others so you need to weigh your spells carefully rather than cycling between your several most powerful nukes until combat is resolved.

I do get the other points, but I don't see why you don't have to weight how you use your spells if they have cooldowns, when said cooldowns aren't short and combat itself is taxing your other resources (health, for example), so that you can't prolong it enough to spam your desired spells over and over again.

 

[Gangrelrumbler]

Does it need to be justified in fluff though? I find it working well within the system you're creating it for being far more important consideration. Was lore ever important when it came to any Baldur's Gate game? Or any cRPG game with magic? Death Gate had its magic explained, but that's because how it worked was very important part of the game (both in fluff and out of fluff), but that was an adventure game with a fixed storyline/progression, which is an entirely different animal.

It becomes an issue when you become unable to process what is happening on the screen. You can imagine that the spell disappears from the mind after being cast, especially if you've read Jack Vance previously. But it's harder to imagine how is it possible that my fighter cannot charge just because he did it some time ago, I can imagine that he's tired from overextending himself but he can do a whirlwind just fine. There needs to be some sort of explanation of what is going on when I click on my fireball spell and see that it's on cooldown.

 

[Silly Germans]

There is nothing intuitive about cooldowns. And there is nothing more limiting than casting times. Imagine having a 3 round casting time, you won't be clamoring for the cooldowns any time soon in that context.

That needs context otherwise it is wrong. First of all it depends on what you can do in 1 round. 3 rounds can mean a lot or next to nothing. Cooldowns are extremely easy to understand and
to grasp. They are very intuitive from a mechanical point of view. You can also easily draw analogies to real life by likening it to exhaustion after an tiresome activity. What is not intuitive about that or less intuitive than other
abstract game mechanics that are common in games ?

 

[DraQ]

Cooldowns can be explained for characters like Wizardry 8 gadgeteer. You use your gizmo, then you need to wait for it to literally cool-down before you can use it again. But yeah, without something physical that needs to literally "cool down" it's hard to explain, and if Wizard himself has to cooldown that doesn't explain individual cooldowns for different spell instead of one cooldown for the wizard.

Precisely. Cooldowns can make sense if use of ability relies on something external to the user: energy weapon or device that actually needs to cool down (or heavy cannon with autoloader), amulet, weather control spells, certain summons, etc. Then the cooldowns are on this object/resource - for example if a wizard casts weather control spell in snowy Northernlandia, then immediately teleports to sunny Tropicia, they can immediately cast their weather control spell again even though it's still on cooldown in northernlandia. Meanwhile a gadgeteer that's tagging along still has his technomagick raygun on cooldown, but he could use another one with or without travel if he had a spare.

Cooldowns don't and can't make sense on individual abilities that are realized by the character themselves.

Vancian magic makes more sense for characters that use a talismans or runes or something like that, you trap some of your magic power in an object, then you destroy it to release it in combat. Which makes you able to recover your magic power and trap it again during the rest.

Vancian is second only to cooldowns in being unreasonable. With memorization fluff it's just cheesy. Without and with component system it's actually a kind of crafting and should be replaced with prepared or "partially pre-cast" spells being actually represented in character's inventory (though with additional restrictions).

I'd rather replace it with DOS2-esque memorization system (you memorize spells, NOT castings), but with spells being memorized from books/scrolls rather than learned by character destroying the physical object, and having to be re-memorized on rest (automatically when applicable). That would create interesting imperfect symmetry between physical and caster types (physical relying on equipment, but having their abilities permanently learned, arcane relying on their library from which they memorize their spell loadout), and make strength useful for casters.

I agree with you, though I would say in this point in particular, wouldn't the "rotation" of spells and "fire-and-forget" nukes be more an issue of the magic systems themselves rather than cooldowns?

Not if resource depletion prevents you from casting that other type of nuke or even weaker spells. Do you cast one nuke (which one?) and then spend the rest of the battle swinging stick, or maybe cast a succession of weaker spells at opportune moments?
VS
Nuke1, Nuke2, Nuke3, Shitty filler spell(s), Nuke1, Nuke2...

Its not like you cant use them together.

It's not like you would want to, apart from few specific cases.
(See Gangrelrumbler 's post)

The fluff point is moot and purely subjective. There are already so many game-y systems anyways, cooldowns aren't any worse or harder to explain if you wish to do so.
Take turn based combat itself as example, that is as game-y as it gets without any logical explanation whatsoever. If you can accept that in a game, how can you have
problems with cooldowns ? Just take them as part of the game mechanics.

Nope. Because if my caster is asked "Why haven't you cast second fireball right after the first, so our companions would still be alive?" he can't answer "game mechanics".

 

[Gangrelrumbler]

You can also easily draw analogies to real life by likening it to exhaustion after an tiresome activity.

No you can't. Because the character is not exhausted, he can do a number of other exhausting things if he wants to, he just can't do this one specific thing. That's what's bonkers about the entire concept.

Also, are you aware that your posts look like this to other people?:

 

[Silly Germans]

You can also easily draw analogies to real life by likening it to exhaustion after an tiresome activity.

No you can't. Because the character is not exhausted, he can do a number of other exhausting things if he wants to, he just can't do this one specific thing. That's what's bonkers about the entire concept.

Also, are you aware that your posts look like this to other people?:
View attachment 13208

No, i was not aware that my posts look like this. They show up normal on my screen. I'll stop paragraphing them for my view, that should help.

The analogy doesn't work one to one, that's a given. The cheap way out is to say that each spell has its own unique magical exhaustion that is restored after waiting a bit. There you go. I am sure if someone spent a bit more effort on an explanation, you could come up with something that is more convincing. The Vancian system is not exactly intuitive either. I only know it from games but my shallow understanding is that it has something to do with memory and that you forget a spell once you casted it. If that is roughly correct how does it make sense to have the same spell prepared multiple times in your spell book ? How can you forget something more than once ? I guess my understanding/information about the Vancian system is incomplete since that doesn't make any sense. None of the infinity games explains exhaustively how magic works, so from a video gaming point of view it doesn't matter much anyways.

I am not arguing for cooldowns everywhere and i don't think they should be forced into games that use an existing system that does fine without them. But in general, i don't see how cooldowns are any worse than other mechanics that are readily accepted. They all have their place and can be used for good or worse. The cases where one is better than the other is mostly due to the surrounding design choices but not an inherent property.

 

[Cryomancer]

its own unique magical exhaustion that is restored after waiting a bit.

Why a fire magician is too exhausted to cast a fireball but he can cast fire rain or fire storm? It makes no sense; is like saying "i need to rest, lifting 50kg is too tiresome, so while resting i will lift 500kg"

likening it to exhaustion after an tiresome activity. What is not intuitive about that or less intuitive than other

Wrong. If i an completely exhausted to do a tiresome activity A, why i can do the tiresome activity B? There are mechanics for fatigued and exhausted on pathfinder kingmaker and if my spell makes enemy exhausted, he can't rage or charge for eg.

 

[Ontopoly]

Did they? Is it gonna be another of those "pure DnD" games, streamlining "unneeded", "time-wasting" mechanics?

Short rests are now per encounter. If I was actually going to ever play this game I would be pretty disappointed. Since I'm not, I'll just tack it on as another reason the game will be shit.

"But we never even like short rests anyways" - Larian shills

It's amazing how everything they totally never even liked perfectly matches up with everything Larian doesn't include or is shit at.

 

[Saravan]

Did they? Is it gonna be another of those "pure DnD" games, streamlining "unneeded", "time-wasting" mechanics?

Short rests are now per encounter. If I was actually going to ever play this game I would be pretty disappointed. Since I'm not, I'll just tack it on as another reason the game will be shit.

"But we never even like short rests anyways" - Larian shills

It's amazing how everything they totally never even liked perfectly matches up with everything Larian doesn't include or is shit at.

The alternative is to force unnecessary camping mechanics which is why isolating it to long rests is a good compromise between game flow and rule adherence. As you are reading this your autism meter is rising and you can't wait to bring up Pathfinder's excellent resource management but deep down you know that became obsolete after a few hours of amassing camping supplies.

 

[Gangrelrumbler]

No, i was not aware that my posts look like this. They show up normal on my screen. I'll stop paragraphing them for my view, that should help.

Everything looks perfect now.

The analogy doesn't work one to one, that's a given. The cheap way out is to say that each spell has its own unique magical exhaustion that is restored after waiting a bit. There you go. I am sure if someone spent a bit more effort on an explanation, you could come up with something that is more convincing. The Vancian system is not exactly intuitive either. I only know it from games but my shallow understanding is that it has something to do with memory and that you forget a spell once you casted it. If that is roughly correct how does it make sense to have the same spell prepared multiple times in your spell book ? How can you forget something more than once ? I guess my understanding/information about the Vancian system is incomplete since that doesn't make any sense. None of the infinity games explains exhaustively how magic works, so from a video gaming point of view it doesn't matter much anyways.

That's actually a pretty good point. How do you memorize the same thing twice?

I am not arguing for cooldowns everywhere and i don't think they should be forced into games that use an existing system that does fine without them. But in general, i don't see how cooldowns are any worse than other mechanics that are readily accepted. They all have their place and can be used for good or worse. The cases where one is better than the other is mostly due to the surrounding design choices but not an inherent property.

All the other system are inferior to the good, old mana system. It's simple, it's flexible, it's self-explanatory, it's logical and it can do things other systems cannot easily do. Like sucking-up magical energy, or recovering it mid-battle. That's why I'm arguing in favor of it against other systems. It's only downside is dumb designers showering players with mana potions, rendering the entire thing useless.

 

[Lilliput McHammersmith]

Did they? Is it gonna be another of those "pure DnD" games, streamlining "unneeded", "time-wasting" mechanics?

Short rests are now per encounter. If I was actually going to ever play this game I would be pretty disappointed. Since I'm not, I'll just tack it on as another reason the game will be shit.

"But we never even like short rests anyways" - Larian shills

It's amazing how everything they totally never even liked perfectly matches up with everything Larian doesn't include or is shit at.

Imagine thinking that enjoying games makes you a shill.

Why even spend time in this thread if Larian triggers you so hard?

 

[Tacgnol]

You can also easily draw analogies to real life by likening it to exhaustion after an tiresome activity.

No you can't. Because the character is not exhausted, he can do a number of other exhausting things if he wants to, he just can't do this one specific thing. That's what's bonkers about the entire concept.

Also, are you aware that your posts look like this to other people?:
View attachment 13208

No, i was not aware that my posts look like this. They show up normal on my screen. I'll stop paragraphing them for my view, that should help.

The analogy doesn't work one to one, that's a given. The cheap way out is to say that each spell has its own unique magical exhaustion that is restored after waiting a bit. There you go. I am sure if someone spent a bit more effort on an explanation, you could come up with something that is more convincing. The Vancian system is not exactly intuitive either. I only know it from games but my shallow understanding is that it has something to do with memory and that you forget a spell once you casted it. If that is roughly correct how does it make sense to have the same spell prepared multiple times in your spell book ? How can you forget something more than once ? I guess my understanding/information about the Vancian system is incomplete since that doesn't make any sense. None of the infinity games explains exhaustively how magic works, so from a video gaming point of view it doesn't matter much anyways.

I am not arguing for cooldowns everywhere and i don't think they should be forced into games that use an existing system that does fine without them. But in general, i don't see how cooldowns are any worse than other mechanics that are readily accepted. They all have their place and can be used for good or worse. The cases where one is better than the other is mostly due to the surrounding design choices but not an inherent property.

With vancian casting the "magic words" disappear from the wizard's head after every spell cast. The spellbook itself is just all the spells they've encountered and copied during their adventures.

When a wizard rests, they don't just sleep they spend a few hours reading their spellbook memorising spells and making preparations for the next day. Fireball would only be recorded once in the spellbook itself.

 

[Cryomancer]

I am pretty sure i addressed that point.

No, your analogy doesn't represent cooldown, exhaustion would prevent a character from doing any "harsh" activity, not just a single one. And you can't find a analogy to represent cooldown except in few things like for eg, a machine gun that can overheat; do you know why? Because cooldowns doesn't exist outside of gaming. And even in the case of a MG42 overheating, the soldier can change the barrel and keep firing. Or fire and risk jamming the gun.

As DraQ said, games with it becomes every time

Nuke 1, Nuke 2, Nuke 3, filler spell 1, filler spell 2 (...) filler spell N, nuke 1, nuke 2(...)

 

[NJClaw]

Did they? Is it gonna be another of those "pure DnD" games, streamlining "unneeded", "time-wasting" mechanics?

Short rests are now per encounter. If I was actually going to ever play this game I would be pretty disappointed. Since I'm not, I'll just tack it on as another reason the game will be shit.

"But we never even like short rests anyways" - Larian shills

It's amazing how everything they totally never even liked perfectly matches up with everything Larian doesn't include or is shit at.

It's amazing how you keep making up arguments and then convince yourself that somebody other than you came up with that (somebody who apparently is a Larian shill even if, mind you, he doesn't fucking exist).

Then, since that's not enough, you also come up with clever answers to those same arguments you invented a few seconds before.

Yeah, those arguments are stupid. But that shouldn't be a big surprise, since they came directly from you.

 

[Gangrelrumbler]

You can also easily draw analogies to real life by likening it to exhaustion after an tiresome activity.

No you can't. Because the character is not exhausted, he can do a number of other exhausting things if he wants to, he just can't do this one specific thing. That's what's bonkers about the entire concept.

Also, are you aware that your posts look like this to other people?:
View attachment 13208

No, i was not aware that my posts look like this. They show up normal on my screen. I'll stop paragraphing them for my view, that should help.

The analogy doesn't work one to one, that's a given. The cheap way out is to say that each spell has its own unique magical exhaustion that is restored after waiting a bit. There you go. I am sure if someone spent a bit more effort on an explanation, you could come up with something that is more convincing. The Vancian system is not exactly intuitive either. I only know it from games but my shallow understanding is that it has something to do with memory and that you forget a spell once you casted it. If that is roughly correct how does it make sense to have the same spell prepared multiple times in your spell book ? How can you forget something more than once ? I guess my understanding/information about the Vancian system is incomplete since that doesn't make any sense. None of the infinity games explains exhaustively how magic works, so from a video gaming point of view it doesn't matter much anyways.

I am not arguing for cooldowns everywhere and i don't think they should be forced into games that use an existing system that does fine without them. But in general, i don't see how cooldowns are any worse than other mechanics that are readily accepted. They all have their place and can be used for good or worse. The cases where one is better than the other is mostly due to the surrounding design choices but not an inherent property.

With vancian casting the "magic words" disappear from the wizard's head after every spell cast. The spellbook itself is just all the spells they've encountered and copied during their adventures.

When a wizard rests, they don't just sleep they spend a few hours reading their spellbook memorising spells and making preparations for the next day. Fireball would only be recorded once in the spellbook itself.

Yes, but imagine have 2 slots for third level spells. You memorize fireball twice to later cast it twice. How do you memorize something twice, and later forget it once but still remember it.

 

[Tacgnol]

You can also easily draw analogies to real life by likening it to exhaustion after an tiresome activity.

No you can't. Because the character is not exhausted, he can do a number of other exhausting things if he wants to, he just can't do this one specific thing. That's what's bonkers about the entire concept.

Also, are you aware that your posts look like this to other people?:
View attachment 13208

No, i was not aware that my posts look like this. They show up normal on my screen. I'll stop paragraphing them for my view, that should help.

The analogy doesn't work one to one, that's a given. The cheap way out is to say that each spell has its own unique magical exhaustion that is restored after waiting a bit. There you go. I am sure if someone spent a bit more effort on an explanation, you could come up with something that is more convincing. The Vancian system is not exactly intuitive either. I only know it from games but my shallow understanding is that it has something to do with memory and that you forget a spell once you casted it. If that is roughly correct how does it make sense to have the same spell prepared multiple times in your spell book ? How can you forget something more than once ? I guess my understanding/information about the Vancian system is incomplete since that doesn't make any sense. None of the infinity games explains exhaustively how magic works, so from a video gaming point of view it doesn't matter much anyways.

I am not arguing for cooldowns everywhere and i don't think they should be forced into games that use an existing system that does fine without them. But in general, i don't see how cooldowns are any worse than other mechanics that are readily accepted. They all have their place and can be used for good or worse. The cases where one is better than the other is mostly due to the surrounding design choices but not an inherent property.

With vancian casting the "magic words" disappear from the wizard's head after every spell cast. The spellbook itself is just all the spells they've encountered and copied during their adventures.

When a wizard rests, they don't just sleep they spend a few hours reading their spellbook memorising spells and making preparations for the next day. Fireball would only be recorded once in the spellbook itself.

Yes, but imagine have 2 slots for third level spells. You memorize fireball twice to later cast it twice. How do you memorize something twice, and later forget it once but still remember it.

The words are magic and finite, think of it as them physically taking up space in the wizards mind. They have space for two third level spells, every time they cast one of those words memorised words disappears from memory.

In some of the flavour texts it's said to require extreme mental endurance to hold onto the spells throughout the day. Hence why they get more spells as they become more experienced and presumably gain better willpower and mental control.

 

[Lilliput McHammersmith]

Am I the only one who doesn’t care about lore reasons explaining magic mechanics? It’s a game, it’s ok for some things to be game-y. Re-attempting dialogue checks is game-y, as are dialogue checks in the first place. It’s all game-y. AC and THACO are game-y.

 

[Silly Germans]

I am pretty sure i addressed that point.

No, your analogy doesn't represent cooldown, exhaustion would prevent a character from doing any "harsh" activity, not just a single one. And you can't find a analogy to represent cooldown except in few things like for eg, a machine gun that can overheat; do you know why? Because cooldowns doesn't exist outside of gaming. And even in the case of a MG42 overheating, the soldier can change the barrel and keep firing. Or fire and risk jamming the gun.

As DraQ said, games with it becomes every time

Nuke 1, Nuke 2, Nuke 3, filler spell 1, filler spell 2 (...) filler spell N, nuke 1, nuke 2(...)

Except it does. You have a separate metaphorical "muscle" for every single spell that is used exactly for this single spell and nothing else. When you learn a new spell you get a new "muscle". And only this single "muscle" is exhausted when you cast that spell, leaving all other muscles ready. With this you have a lame but consistent explanation for cooldowns. This is a fairly straightforward extension of normal exhaustion in the sense that you can train your biceps without straining your glutes. Its not one to one but close enough to reality so that anyone should be able to relate to it unless he is obstinate on purpose. Now, if i was a some fancy writer i could make up a nicer sounding explanation, invent fancy terms, write some books, whatever. I think it doesn't take a stretch of imagination to see that you could build fluff that explains cooldowns, just like you have fluff that explains the vancian system.

 

[Anonona]

The words are magic and finite, think of it as them physically taking up space in the wizards mind. They have space for two third level spells, every time they cast one of those words memorised words disappears from memory.

In some of the flavour texts it's said to require extreme mental endurance to hold onto the spells throughout the day. Hence why they get more spells as they become more experienced and presumably gain better willpower and mental control.

Wouldn't that explanation also work for cooldowns? Instead of 8 hours they can do it in a few seconds or minutes. The big issue to justifying cooldowns is when we speak about physical skills. Of course you can make some simple explanation like saying that fighters use hidden vital energy reserves that allows them reality breaking feats in different ways, but need to recover this energy, so they develop a fighting system where they combine regular fighting (regular attacks, blocking, stances, etc) with "super powers" like creating weaves by hitting the ground, being able to jump several meters high, launching a force blast, etc.

As DraQ said, games with it becomes every time

Nuke 1, Nuke 2, Nuke 3, filler spell 1, filler spell 2 (...) filler spell N, nuke 1, nuke 2(...)

Not necessarily true, it is more a matter of spell selections and game mechanics. When spells and skill aren't just "big nukes", and have multiple uses, and enemies have different ways of countering them, it becomes more of a game of "when" to use it. D:OS 2 makes a pretty decent job with some of its skills. Warfare, for example, specially starting out, have skills like Battering Ram, which rush you forward, hitting enemies along the way, and knocking down those that don't have physical armor. In this case, you can use it for AoE damage, to gain a new position, avoiding AoO, or to CC enemies, but when and why you use it depends on how combat is going. The same with Battle Stomp, which can be use to CC, clean elemental areas, or AoE damage, and even to reach far away targets in a pinch. Because of cooldowns when to use them is really important, and they work together with the other system to make you value when is the right moment to do so. The focus on combos of spells and skill and environmental interactions works together to make skill usage being more tactical.

The greatness of P:KM and D&D magic comes more because of their spell selection than the vanician system itself. Or would you say that, if the spells were like some lame jrpg where you gain Fire, Fire II and Fire III, and status effects are weak, that the Vanician would suddenly make the system better? If anything, what Vanician and Resource system have as an edge are the inclusion of managing how many spells you have until the end of the dungeon, with the resource system (mana, mp, etc) having a bit of an edge in my opinion because it is more flexible when it comes to create systems (potions, camping, draining enemies MP, meditating, etc).

 

[Tacgnol]

Am I the only one who doesn’t care about lore reasons explaining magic mechanics? It’s a game, it’s ok for some things to be game-y. Re-attempting dialogue checks is game-y, as are dialogue checks in the first place. It’s all game-y. AC and THACO are game-y.

I don't think it matters a great deal, I was just offering an explanation. The lore does however explain why magic works the way it does in D&D/Pathfinder for people who don't know a lot about the settings.

 

[Elex]

Why there is a 7 page discussion about sorcerervictor magical fetish?

 

[Silly Germans]

Am I the only one who doesn’t care about lore reasons explaining magic mechanics? It’s a game, it’s ok for some things to be game-y. Re-attempting dialogue checks is game-y, as are dialogue checks in the first place. It’s all game-y. AC and THACO are game-y.

I don't think it matters a great deal, I was just offering an explanation. The lore does however explain why magic works the way it does in D&D/Pathfinder for people who don't know a lot about the settings.

Does the lore explain why low level spells can't be learned in high level spell slots ? Or is this a restriction that the video games introduced ?