Combat magic vs Pure melee

Morgoth
Posts: 169
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2016 3:41 am

Combat magic vs Pure melee

Postby Morgoth » Wed Jun 22, 2016 6:21 pm

So how does magic in combat compare with a fighter going pure melee? Say a mage and a fighter of the same experience fight a similar opponent, who would have a better chance of winning?

User avatar
Lambert
Posts: 442
Joined: Fri May 27, 2016 2:13 pm
Location: Glasgow, Scotland

Re: Combat magic vs Pure melee

Postby Lambert » Wed Jun 22, 2016 6:25 pm

If you are fighting 1 target and don't care about using all your astral energy the wizard should do better.

The problem is that after that fight the wizard will need days of time to rebuild his store of energy, whereas the warrior can always fight.

Flash
Posts: 372
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2016 1:39 pm

Re: Combat magic vs Pure melee

Postby Flash » Thu Jun 23, 2016 6:24 am

Most of the times the Fighter will come out on top.

A Mage needs the right combination of learned spells, full AE pool , range and often time to come close to a well build Fighter in combat.
He is much more effective in combat when he acts in a support role to the Fighter.

Spell casters in TDE don't get as overpowered as for example in high level D&D.

Morgoth
Posts: 169
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2016 3:41 am

Re: Combat magic vs Pure melee

Postby Morgoth » Thu Jun 23, 2016 7:08 am

Lambert wrote:If you are fighting 1 target and don't care about using all your astral energy the wizard should do better.

The problem is that after that fight the wizard will need days of time to rebuild his store of energy, whereas the warrior can always fight.


This was true in the older editions, but is it still true in 5e rules? In fact, with certain spells such as Transformation (transforming enemy into something else) a Wizard could end the fight with a single spell. At least that's what I remember from Realms of Arkania games.

Also spell of paralysis, paralyze then slit enemies throat before he turns fully to stone like substance (is this possible?)

Another thing, in the games spells like Daemonology (Summoning Heshthots) and summoning elementals could be cast in combat. Now they are rituals that take at least half an hour. Any reason for this? It's not like summoning demons was ever safe, many were the combats my party got TPKd due to a ferocious Zhant that turned on my PCs.

Finally, what about the new spell compendium due to be out in Germany? Any sweet spells in that? I recall Blackguards had a fireball type spell

Thorgarth
Posts: 113
Joined: Fri May 27, 2016 1:58 pm

Re: Combat magic vs Pure melee

Postby Thorgarth » Thu Jun 23, 2016 8:01 am

I´m struggling to understand why mages cannot modify the damage component of spells. It´s one of the Key components AND a logical way for mages to try to circumvent their relatively weakness in combat. They strength (casting of spells) is restricted by the need to use AE to fuel the spells, which is a scarce and limited resource. Whereas other characters can swing an axe or thrust a short sword to their hearts delight, the mage is very limited in the number of spells he can cast, can be interrupted by distractions and if you look at the dmg tables for weapons and the damaging spells it does´t look better.

One way to counterbalance this was to allow them to invest power (AE) to strengthen their spell´s damage factor.

thebwt
Posts: 18
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2016 12:08 pm

Re: Combat magic vs Pure melee

Postby thebwt » Thu Jun 23, 2016 8:06 am

Morgoth wrote:Also spell of paralysis, paralyze then slit enemies throat before he turns fully to stone like substance (is this possible?)


The spell is instant, so the QL5 effect which 'effectively turn one into stone' would take someone out of them game for a bit. Also people turned to stone can still be injured with magic weapons.

Still though, QL5...
Check out the unofficial slack channel @ https://rpg-talk.com/ , join us in #the_dark_eye

Flash
Posts: 372
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2016 1:39 pm

Re: Combat magic vs Pure melee

Postby Flash » Thu Jun 23, 2016 9:40 am

Thorgarth wrote:I´m struggling to understand why mages cannot modify the damage component of spells. It´s one of the Key components AND a logical way for mages to try to circumvent their relatively weakness in combat.


That is intentional. TDE Mages were never meant to be combat monsters and I doubt that they will ever be. Would be too much out of tone for Aventuria. When you want to be strong in combat you play a Fighter. Mages are there for other things.
Last edited by Flash on Thu Jun 23, 2016 9:43 am, edited 1 time in total.

thebwt
Posts: 18
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2016 12:08 pm

Re: Combat magic vs Pure melee

Postby thebwt » Thu Jun 23, 2016 9:42 am

Thorgarth wrote:One way to counterbalance this was to allow them to invest power (AE) to strengthen their spell´s damage factor.


To a certain extent, this exists. Take AE cost up a tier and get a bonus on the spell, which eventually funnels into QL
Check out the unofficial slack channel @ https://rpg-talk.com/ , join us in #the_dark_eye

User avatar
Bosper
Posts: 634
Joined: Mon May 30, 2016 8:38 am

Re: Combat magic vs Pure melee

Postby Bosper » Thu Jun 23, 2016 10:13 am

Morgoth wrote:
Lambert wrote:Another thing, in the games spells like Daemonology (Summoning Heshthots) and summoning elementals could be cast in combat. Now they are rituals that take at least half an hour. Any reason for this? It's not like summoning demons was ever safe, many were the combats my party got TPKd due to a ferocious Zhant that turned on my PCs.

Finally, what about the new spell compendium due to be out in Germany? Any sweet spells in that? I recall Blackguards had a fireball type spell


Its a long time until the new spellbook will be out. But the Magic Supplements will contain most (close to all) spells i think. Hundreds of Spells and spell variants.
And there are a few very potent combat spells in TDE, like the fireball already published in Quarreling Kingdoms (5 metres radius 2d6+QL*3 ) but those are extremely expensive (32 AE +) and take a few rounds to cast.
As been said, dealing damage never was a main focus for a mage in TDE. They got dozens of supporting and hindering spells and again dozens of out-of-combat spells that are enourmously useful. Mages are scientists and scholars, not soldiers. A Combat Mage would be able to cast a few ignifaxius' or a fireball followed by an armour spell and melee combat.
But with the damage linked to the QL, combat spells already are more cost effective than in previous editions ( before it always was fixed dmg and dmg=AE cost)

Summoning never was something that could be done in combat in TDE, that was only changed for the video games, no PC gamer would want to watch 15 minutes of performing a ritual on screen. A summoner has to call his demons or elementals pre-combat, if he expects he needs them. Then again, those are very powerful, so its a fair deal not to cast them instantly.

Morgoth
Posts: 169
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2016 3:41 am

Re: Combat magic vs Pure melee

Postby Morgoth » Thu Jun 23, 2016 11:17 am

Bosper wrote:
Morgoth wrote:
Lambert wrote:Another thing, in the games spells like Daemonology (Summoning Heshthots) and summoning elementals could be cast in combat. Now they are rituals that take at least half an hour. Any reason for this? It's not like summoning demons was ever safe, many were the combats my party got TPKd due to a ferocious Zhant that turned on my PCs.

Finally, what about the new spell compendium due to be out in Germany? Any sweet spells in that? I recall Blackguards had a fireball type spell


Its a long time until the new spellbook will be out. But the Magic Supplements will contain most (close to all) spells i think. Hundreds of Spells and spell variants.
And there are a few very potent combat spells in TDE, like the fireball already published in Quarreling Kingdoms (5 metres radius 2d6+QL*3 ) but those are extremely expensive (32 AE +) and take a few rounds to cast.
As been said, dealing damage never was a main focus for a mage in TDE. They got dozens of supporting and hindering spells and again dozens of out-of-combat spells that are enourmously useful. Mages are scientists and scholars, not soldiers. A Combat Mage would be able to cast a few ignifaxius' or a fireball followed by an armour spell and melee combat.
But with the damage linked to the QL, combat spells already are more cost effective than in previous editions ( before it always was fixed dmg and dmg=AE cost)

Summoning never was something that could be done in combat in TDE, that was only changed for the video games, no PC gamer would want to watch 15 minutes of performing a ritual on screen. A summoner has to call his demons or elementals pre-combat, if he expects he needs them. Then again, those are very powerful, so its a fair deal not to cast them instantly.


Sweet; Bosper could you translate the Fireball spell from the Quarelling Kingdoms book here plz? :D


Return to “Rules Questions (TDE)”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest