|
Originally Posted by NES Oldskooler
Take a similar combat situation, only we're now playing a geriatric wizard. He has a low strength, and has overall much less experience in weapons than our young hero. He rolls a die to attack the same goblin and gets a 16. Even though his attack bonus has degenerated to -5 in his old age, the attack is still enough to hit the goblin.
This is my main issue with dice rolling. In my opinion, a pathetic old man with little combat experience should not be able to fight on the same ground as a trained fighter in any situation. Yeah, I know the fighter will obviously have more health, be able to swing harder, and on average will have more hits because of his attack bonus. The fact remains, though, that depending on how the dice roll, the old wizard could potentially beat him in a one on one sword fight.
|
To be fair, in a game like Baldur's Gate this would never happen. Multi/duel classing asside (which can complicate matters a little bit) -- Wizards/Sorcerers can only be "proficient" in their weapon styles (ever) while a vanilla fighter could go all the way to grand mastery right off the bat. Not to mention the higher hp rolls and starting hp/available equipment. Even completely naked with both characters wielding daggers or quarterstaves the mage character would never be able to kill the fighter before he explodes the mage into tiny little chunks of flesh, likely from a overkill critical hit. My point is that you overexaggerated a bit.
In a game like Oblivion this is a little more complicated, same for morrowind. But realistically, without power gaming it is the same situation. It simply isn't chosen right off the bat in a character creation screen... Instead you decide rather you want to be a mage or a fighter with the actions you choose in battle. I concede, though, that in both these games with a little effort a mage and warrior has little distinction but that isn't really an advantage for a mage, since the warrior could easily do the reverse and learn magic. Still, it isn't a problem with die rolls, which is what you were insinuating but rather an issue with the way some games are set up. Starting at a higher level than 1 (6/6 or 8 in BG2 for example) is a nice way to try and offset that, though. I guess.
Masquerades has some pretty annoying issues even with user-fixes BTW. The game has a frustrating memory leak, so if you don't have good ram (gig minimum, even with 1.5 if I play for more than 2 hours straight the game gets stuttery) I'd avoid the game until you get a decent upgrade. Arcanum is pretty good, though, and doesn't have too many issues. Combat is severely unbalanced, though. Harm mage can solo through everything without a sweat. There isn't much need for any other magic, or much incentive to play tech when you realize harm is all you need to own everything in the game.
I take it based on bradylama's points, too, that he has an argument against most RPGs being wrongfully branded and not really just issues with Oblivion being a "bad game". I don't really care to argue something like that because it's just too broad a subject. I think something of that calibur deserves it's own thread, rather than be minorly debated here in a thread where it's almost off-topic.
I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?