Place Your Bets - BG Forum Gunslinging Western!
This is an offshoot of the discussion on who the most overrated NPC is. I have decided to take my diversion off the original post. Here is my original post:
---------------
@Elrandir @SionIV
Just a question to throw at the both of you. Other readers are welcome to weigh in too ^_^
Let's say you are fighting each other in a gunfighting duel like those portrayed in old Westerns. Each of you has a 0.44 Magnum (say, the newest Smith and Wesson Model 29) that you are using for the duel. @Elrandir has three bullets in his handgun. @SionIV has six bullets in his handgun.
I have two questions:
1. Who has the more powerful gun?
2. Who will win the duel, and why?
This is more for curiosity and amusement - not just for myself, but also to illustrate something for the reader. No need to read too much into the questions for now - just answer the two questions I posed. Thank you
---------------
I enclose responses from @SionIV and @Blackraven
@SionIV
Normally? It wouldn't make a difference, only requires one well placed shot.
But when you can dodge (AC), be immune (Mantle, PFMW) or have thick hide like a Rhino (Damage reduction) then you'll want as many shots as possible. :P
1.) We have a gun of equal power.
2.) Hopefully Elrandir has a horrible aim so 3 bullets might not be enough for him. I do know that i have a horrible aim, but i'm sure that i'll hit at least one out of six. So, i'll be the winner! Unless he's like REALLY lucky or very skilled with firearms, then i'll demand someone else to be tested against.
I do agree with you here, god is quite a bit far to go.
Mages -> Highest on the food chain.
CHARNAME -> Child of Bhaal.
Edwin -> DEMI god.
Let's not go over the top here *nods*
@Blackraven
I have to agree with @SionIV here. Besides, in the game duels are as rare as they are awesome, so since you have to deal so often with mobs rather than individuals 6 bullets is better.
Nevertheless, I also agree with @Elrandir that one extra spell per level doesn't make Edwin some kind of God. The only difference with other specialist mages (charname or mod NPCs) is that you might have to rest a few times less.
----------
Alright gentlemen, place your bets! ^_^
---------------
@Elrandir @SionIV
Just a question to throw at the both of you. Other readers are welcome to weigh in too ^_^
Let's say you are fighting each other in a gunfighting duel like those portrayed in old Westerns. Each of you has a 0.44 Magnum (say, the newest Smith and Wesson Model 29) that you are using for the duel. @Elrandir has three bullets in his handgun. @SionIV has six bullets in his handgun.
I have two questions:
1. Who has the more powerful gun?
2. Who will win the duel, and why?
This is more for curiosity and amusement - not just for myself, but also to illustrate something for the reader. No need to read too much into the questions for now - just answer the two questions I posed. Thank you
---------------
I enclose responses from @SionIV and @Blackraven
@SionIV
Normally? It wouldn't make a difference, only requires one well placed shot.
But when you can dodge (AC), be immune (Mantle, PFMW) or have thick hide like a Rhino (Damage reduction) then you'll want as many shots as possible. :P
1.) We have a gun of equal power.
2.) Hopefully Elrandir has a horrible aim so 3 bullets might not be enough for him. I do know that i have a horrible aim, but i'm sure that i'll hit at least one out of six. So, i'll be the winner! Unless he's like REALLY lucky or very skilled with firearms, then i'll demand someone else to be tested against.
I do agree with you here, god is quite a bit far to go.
Mages -> Highest on the food chain.
CHARNAME -> Child of Bhaal.
Edwin -> DEMI god.
Let's not go over the top here *nods*
@Blackraven
I have to agree with @SionIV here. Besides, in the game duels are as rare as they are awesome, so since you have to deal so often with mobs rather than individuals 6 bullets is better.
Nevertheless, I also agree with @Elrandir that one extra spell per level doesn't make Edwin some kind of God. The only difference with other specialist mages (charname or mod NPCs) is that you might have to rest a few times less.
----------
Alright gentlemen, place your bets! ^_^
Post edited by jacobtan on
2
Comments
At least as interesting would be NPC duels IMO. Two NPCs, no pre-buffs, just their spells or their weapon of choice.
I've only seen a death duel between two of my NPCs once. It had Quayle prevail over Tiax.
While this is true in a larger party, you'll notice how amazing his additional spell is if you've ever played with a smaller party or soloed as an Arcane caster.
"If you get the job done with 3 spells, why would you need 6?"
I am looking for a bit more actually:
1. For those who CAN get the job done with 3 spells, how do you do it?
2. For those who NEED 6 spells, do you end up wasting spells and hence it is as if you only have 3 spells?
3. In practice, is it feasible to run effectively on fewer spells without impairing your combat effectiveness?
2.) You have several options when you have 6 spells. This will increase your efficiency, survivability and all around success rate.
3.) You can run with fewer spells, it'll just make it harder.
I would look at it like the requirements for a computer game.
3 spells - Minimum requirement
4 spells - Recommended
6 spells - Great performance
While 3 spells is all you need, you'll get a better performance for having more.
I too feel the duel analogy somewhat bypasses the fact that there are not many such situations in-game. Furthermore, bullets are offensive firepower, akin to Magic Missile, Flame Arrow, and the like, whereas spells include things like PfMW, Stoneskin, Shield, etc. Because of this added versatility, I think it's more accurate to ask:
Who will win:
1. Person with 3 bullets?
2. Person with 3 bullets, a Kevlar vest, and a riot shield?
All of that said, I'd always want more spells.
@jackjack
I am not exactly looking at things in such a complicated manner. Just 3 vs 6 bullets. No Kevlar, no riot shield, no Wonder Woman's bulletproof bracers, nothing of that sort
On the subject of bets, is there any possibility of someone fronting me a loan of 15 gold coins?
After all, there's no way to block bullets with your own bullets, even if you're rocking 25 Dexterity, except through sheer luck.
1. Unused spells is unused power, which is as good as no power. Therefore, having excess spells is not quite necessary unless there is a situation where I need to use the excess spells. This situation is worse in a party with many mages or with a full party. Also, sometimes, the combination of spells is wrong
- e.g. You have 1 Time Stop, 1 Improved Alacrity and 1 Summon Planetar. If you need another set of three spells to get through your next battle, it does not quite matter whether you have two more slots, since you have to rest up to get a full set
Conclusion - unused spells are good to have but have no bearing on the outcome or the course of combat simply because they are not tapped.
2. It does not matter how I win as long as I win. If I need to fight in waves and retreat halfway through a battle to rest up, so be it. Excess spells does not fall under the category of potency, but flexibility and stamina, since casting level is capped at L20 no matter which mage we are talking about
Conclusion - excess spells are beneficial in allowing more options and fighting longer than usual, but has no direct bearing on spell potency and effectiveness in battle
3. Some players are very skilled at pre-battle scouting, targeting, and so on. Others are not. Or perhaps due to play-style, you need a different number of spells. If you are a magic-happy player or your combat skill as a player is lower (e.g. @SionIV saying he needs 6 bullets to guarantee a hit instead of 3), then it is a very valid situation to need 6 bullets... 3 bullets is just not enough. But if you are skilled enough to run on 3 all the time, then 6 bullets is overkill.
Conclusion - whether a player needs the extra spells is more dependent on his play style and skill, so there is no definite conclusion here.
That said, I see this "Edwin vs other mage" contest has having no definitive outcome. I would say Edwin has an advantage because he gets a faster spell progression (at L18, he gets 4 L9 slots immediately instead of 2 for other specialist mage), but as both mages progress to max level, the additional slots need not always matter. When the additional spells are unused, Edwin is no better than any other NPC mage. And I am not fond of single-class characters anyway, so Edwin and my PC will never occupy the same niche
Those who need only 3 spells and are willing and able to work around the lack of additional slots will find Edwin overrated (like me). Others who love spells will want as many as they can get, so Edwin will never be overrated. There is no real resolution to this question
P.S. I usually run with a full party, but I will nearly always send decoys to draw out enemies or even run away halfway through a battle after taking out a minion or two. Neither am I averse to sitting around and waiting for spells to expire while I get a coffee, or huddling at a corner, invisible, and continually summoning fresh summons to harass enemies
It's better to have unused spells that you can use in difficult situations than to run out of spells. It also makes for a more relaxed and comfortable playing, knowing that even if you do fail you'll be able to survive because you got spare spells in your spellbook.
2.) It's just silly to use an argument like this. If you're going to run away half way through the battle to rest up, you can go through the game with a bard having 3 in all stats.
Having more spells means that you're able to be in the fight longer. Take fights like Melissan where you can't run away, here you'll be grateful for the extra spells you have. So of course having more spells will make you more potent and effective.
3.) I'm skilled enough to run with 3 bullets, but i'm also playing no-reload games and having that one extra stoneskin or mirror image will and have saved my behind several times. It has nothing to do with skills or playstyle, it has to do with more options and more options in BG2 when it comes to spells means more power.
A mage is the most powerful class in BG2 because of arcane magic and his spells.
Having more spells means you're more powerful in BG2.
Edwin has the most spells in the game, meaning he is the most powerful arcane caster.
It really is that simple when it comes to it.
It's like having a car that reach a speed of 200KM/H and having a car that can reach a speed of 120KM/H. You might not always end up using those extra horsepower, but they are there and when you do need them, your car will be faster and more 'powerful' than the other car.
[Edited] :
Would also like to mention that most of your arcane spells should be defensive spells. So having more spells will let you chose more damage spells. You'll be able to finish the fight quicker, this means the enemy won't get as many turns which means you'll take less damage and the chance of dying is much lower.
- Did these extra spells contribute meaningfully to the outcome? Would it have mattered if they were some "generally-considered-useless" spells instead of all-time favorites?
It's better to have unused spells that you can use in difficult situations than to run out of spells. It also makes for a more relaxed and comfortable playing, knowing that even if you do fail you'll be able to survive because you got spare spells in your spellbook.
- Yes, this is why I said it is a function of player skill and play style. I concur on this point.
2.) It's just silly to use an argument like this. If you're going to run away half way through the battle to rest up, you can go through the game with a bard having 3 in all stats.
- What is the problem with retreating halfway if it is the most advantageous option? This is a play style difference. I am in the business of overcoming enemies and insisting on clearing a battle in one sitting is silly machismo.
Having more spells means that you're able to be in the fight longer. Take fights like Melissan where you can't run away, here you'll be grateful for the extra spells you have. So of course having more spells will make you more potent and effective.
- Actually, I don't really use that many spells in combat, but like I said, your mileage varies according to play style. For me, I usually make heavy use of rods and wands, then buffs and debuffs, and direct damage spells are a last resort or an opening sequence.
3.) I'm skilled enough to run with 3 bullets, but i'm also playing no-reload games and having that one extra stoneskin or mirror image will and have saved my behind several times. It has nothing to do with skills or playstyle, it has to do with more options and more options in BG2 when it comes to spells means more power.
- Again, we have to agree to disagree. You consider potential as power. I only consider potential as power when it is actualized. This is a philosophical difference and I doubt we can agree here
A mage is the most powerful class in BG2 because of arcane magic and his spells.
Having more spells means you're more powerful in BG2.
Edwin has the most spells in the game, meaning he is the most powerful arcane caster.
It really is that simple when it comes to it.
It's like having a car that reach a speed of 200KM and having a car that can reach a speed of 120KM. You might not always end up using those extra horsepower, but they are there and when you do need them, your car will be faster and more 'powerful' than the other car.
- I quote you: "WHEN YOU DO NEED THEM". That is the crux of the argument I am making. If as a player, you are able to play such that you will never have this need, then you will never need this extra horsepower, rendering it irrelevant.
You have unwittingly affirmed my case
1 Magic Missile
1 Mirror Image
1 Melfs Minute Meteros
1 Stoneskin
1 Spell Immunity / Cloudkill
1 Protection from Magic
1 Mordenkainen's Sword
1 Abi-Dalzim's Horrid Wilting
1 Timestop
Using only those spells you'll be able to win a fight on your own. So he has enough firepower from 1 more spell per level to actually win an entire fight on his own.
This is CHARNAME now let's look at Imoen or Aerie.
2 Magic Missile
1 Mirror Image
1 Blur
1 Melfs Minute Meteros
1 Skull Trap
1 Stoneskin
1 Fire Shield Red
1 Spell Immunity
1 Cloudkill
1 Protection from Magical Weapons
1 Chain lightning
1 Mordenkainen's Sword
1 Summon Efreeti
1 Abi-Dalzim's Horrid Wilting
1 Simulcram
1 Timestop
1 Dragon's Breath.
When Imoen or Nalia get their first level 9 spell, Edwin will have 3 (!) of them already.
The low level spells might not look like much, but when you look at the higher level spells you'll see how much of a difference there really is. A dragon's breath and Abi-Dalzim's Horrid Wilting will clear an entire party of enemies. Mordenkainen's Sword and the Efreeti can tank and deal great damage. An extra timestop let's you throw out more spells without getting interrupted. The Simulcram grants you even more spells.
There shouldn't be a doubt here, that one extra spell per level is that great.
"Having gear on your character doesn't make him more powerful! He doesn't need it to win the fight, so there is absolutely no difference with a naked paladin wielding a longsword +1 and another in full plate mail +2 with Carsomyr"
You should try to play a solo mage sometime, you'll be surprised.
0.44 Magnum with 3 bullets isn't more powerful than a rusty broken 10MM from Fallout 3 with one bullet. Because you only need one bullet to the head to put him down, and if you fail the first 20 times don't worry, you can always reload.
I quote myself:
"...I would say Edwin has an advantage because he gets a faster spell progression (at L18, he gets 4 L9 slots immediately instead of 2 for other specialist mage), but as both mages progress to max level, the additional slots need not always matter..."
I preempted your argument before you posted it, because I guessed you would
Though you still do not make sense.
"...Using only those spells you'll be able to win a fight on your own. So he has enough firepower from 1 more spell per level to actually win an entire fight on his own."
With 1 spell per level, Edwin can win an entire fight on his own, but don't you rest regularly? Is your party so hard-up that you cannot or will not rest regularly after every other fight or so?
Imoen and Aerie are mages of a different niches, so let us keep them out
You know that in order to spark a chain reaction, you need to have an initial spark of energy to get things going. If the spark of energy is not strong enough, you do not get the chain reaction. But even if you trigger with double, triple or quadruple the required energy, you do not get anything more.
Similarly, an outfitted paladin does not need Carsomyr to win a fight against a goblin. But against a balor, he may need more equips to get to the "minimum-required level of power" to win.
What I am saying for Edwin is that, using your estimate, having just 1 more spell per level would win a fight on his own, he is already way above the "minimum-required level of power" to win, hence it is inconsequential even if he has 1000000 spells memorized.
A skull trap that deals 3D10 will kill a group of goblins.
A skull trap that deals 10D10 will also kill the goblin, but it's more powerful.
A mage having 1 more spell per level to use is more powerful than a mage that doens't.
Last post for me. And you can move this topic back to the Gameplay one, as there is nothing of-topic with it anymore.
A skull trap that deals 3d10 damage will kill a group of goblins.
Does having two skull traps make a mage more powerful than another with only one skull trap?
As I have already said, it is a debate between "potential = power" vs "actualized potential = power".
I would love to use a shotgun. I am not a macho guy who insists on personal marksmanship. I just want something that works with maximum convenience (a.k.a. I am fat and lazy XD)
But really, linking back to the thread topic, if you're a good marksman who can run on two bullets, good for you. Just shows that you're able to get more for less. Same for spellcasting. Cast as many spells as you need, but if you don't need all that many spells, more power to you.