|
| Thread: Heroes IV: Theory Analysis |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 · «PREV |
|
ThE_HyDrA
Admirable
Famous Hero
The Leader of all Hydras
|
posted April 23, 2003 04:09 AM |
|
|
Differing opinions on this topic.....
After a strong support for heroes in combat being weak, it seems as though some people believe that they are in fact too strong..... As for other issues, it is obvious that some people are going to have different perceptions on how well this change did in the grand scheme of Heroes IV.
Now, it is difficult to know who's right and who's wrong, since within the game, there are many differentiating styles of play, and this encompasses differing features working in constantly changing ways. A style of a player may constitute using caravans a lot, and therefore liking them, however, another might just see them as a nuisance and a wasted idea for the towns inventory.
Nasty:
"Indeed 4 creature are to little and i dont like that you have to choose between them...many creatures havent been used at all."
Yes, 4 levels are too little for a diverse strategy game such as Heroes IV, however, there are 5 creatures you can choose. Some might argue that 5 creatures is not enough. I would agree with them, in actuality. Even though if you manage to capture an enemy town that is the same alignment as your own, you are, by and large, going to pick the same creatures as in your primary town. So, the system doesn't allow for differentiation. You are correct in saying that many don't get used at all. However, it is not a huge problem for me, since I could just start another scenario and use a totally different strategy. It does allow for felxibility, which is a positive aspect of the system.
"And where are the special abilities?thats something very important....when you say gelu you think at the sharpshooters...when you say aislyin you think at meteor shower"
I agree, this was something that was severely lacking from Heroes IV. The hero specialties were one of the intrumental aspects in making the heroes unique, and not turning them into another face in the crowd with a possibility of turning into something unique. They need to be an individual right from the word 'go'. This entails a unique hero path, with a special ability, and his or her background to have a small effect on the choice of skills. A template can be found below:
A. 1 skill increase in your hero's most proficient skill group
B. 1 skill increase in your secondary skill group
C. 1 skill increase in a skill group you have already
D. 1 skill in a new skill group.
If for some reason you can't be offered any of the above, you will get less than four choices to pick from.
EldarionZTG I:
"Heey... we're neighbours, I'm from Croatia..."
Do you live there? Since I currently live in Australia, I only staying in Italy for about 4 years. Loved it though.
Van:
"They are not too week. Sometimes ,they are too strong."
In what instances are they too strong? I admit that I have had past experiences where my hero was strong for a hero, but it still could not match the strength of about 5 level 4 creatures. They can be powerful, but taking into account the opposing army strengths they are just defeated too easily. The might hero because they usually have to go out into the open and attack, and the magic hero because their attack/defense ratings aren't high.
"I dont understand how someone can find heroes week. Especially with current, brain dead AI."
Point granted, the AI can be brain dead in some parts. However, the AI being sub-par does not have much to do with the heroes. In the adventure map, the AI is asinine, but on the combat map, they can be quite tricky. However, just because the AI are weak, doesn't make the heroes any stronger. Believe it or not, the AI can easily defeat your heroes in battle, and in a very short time, too. The AI is not as weak in combat as you may think it is.
"In my opinion ,Heroes on battlefield - biggest inprovement over H3 , big plus for NWC here."
Most likely that is true. For me, it was a beneficial change, which made heroes more involved, and in turn forced hero development to become paramount. However, the climax, heroes in combat, was poorly implemented, and, as you can see, people are still talking about it today. 
EmperorSly:
"in any case, heroes must be on the battlefield, because while on travel WHERELSE COULD THEY BE?"
Correct, if they are going to stand on the sidelines like Heroes I-III, it would be most unrealistic, and they could just as easily take 3 steps forward and play an active role in the battle. You have explained it very well in relating to Lord of the Rings.
Also, having the heroes stand aside, it really gives them an invulnerable, god-like status. And why should the heroes die when their army gets captured? That perplexed me as a young kid when I first played Heroes II. Heroes IV contained the right idea, now they just need to finish the job.
"seriously, a good barbarian can beat a bunch of dragons all by himself."
I highly doubt it, if you're talking about the dragons of the black variety. However, this really isn't the problem. What the problem is, in my opinion, is in fact the variable time the hero and the town with the dragons develops. About week 12, lets say, the hero would be at about level 8? 9? It is most likely that the opposing army has maybe 2 or 3 Black Dragons. As they both progress, the latter receiving one Black Dragon a weak, we reach month 6. There are maybe 13 Black Dragons, while the hero is only on level 16 or so. It is obvious who is going to win this battle. It is all relative to the power of the opposing player.
Edited: I only play on Single Player Champion.
"in heroes III hero with one halfling couldnt even dream of killing a dragon."
It depends how strong the hero is. However, because of the Heroes III mechanics, it is obvious that the hero would lose. To get a better interpretation. Get a creature with the same characteristics as a hero, but don't let it attack. So it may last as long as a hero would in combat. Then, you could get a fair represenatation, and I think you'll find the hero comes out on top.
EldarionZTG II: "Heroes of M&M is just a title of the game, but that does not mean you play only with heroes."
I think, in a way, it should. Since it would be inane to call a game Heroes of Might and Magic, and the Heroes of the game only playing a minor role! Sounds a bit obscure to me....
"Waging great battles with lots of different creatures was always a trademark of this game, and if heroes replace them completely than we will have nothing left but a very BAD rpg... "
I do not believe that would be the case. At its heart, Heroes is a strategy game, and it has multitudinous aspects to glorify its name in the strategy gaming world. It would be nice to bring back aspects of previous Heroes Series in order to make this game a classical experience. A blend of the old and the new.
"Creatures are the most important element of the Heroes of M&M series. And that's a fact."
That's true in one respect. Heroes are more important on the adventure map. However Heroes should be just as important as creatures are on the battlefield. The presence of one hero should equal the presence of one stack of creatures.
Thankyou all for your insights, it certainly has been interesting discussing and reading your valuable thoughts. 
____________
"Dragons may breathe fire, but Hydras have many heads." - The Creed of Hydras
"As the Dragon drew its breath, the Hydra pounced, swiftly but powerfully, and the Dragon was defeated.”
|
|
valkyrica
Supreme Hero
|
posted April 23, 2003 07:02 AM |
|
|
Hydra, obviously you haven't played multiplayer if you state that week 12 a hero will be level 8-9
Most maps end before middle of week 3 with not one hero, but 3,4 above level 14,15 ... and doing the math, you can have black dragons earliest day 5 (very very rich map), middle of week 3 you have 3 black dragons opposed to 4 level 15 heroes ... mind you that only one combat hero can kill all of them no problem !
A combat hero with 5,6 potions of immortality can take a dragon city out in week 2 day 3,4 ... the city has 6 blacks by then and you would probably have a level 10,11 combat hero.
At level 18,19 a combat hero can kill 10 black dragons with a few immo potions, so they can be very very strong, but in player to player face offs, they can be weak if you count only on them.
|
|
insatiable
Supreme Hero
Ultimate N00bidity
|
|
posted April 23, 2003 08:23 AM |
|
|
heh yes,
each one is judging game by its own experience..
Valky says Hydra talks out of no MP experience.
then,next thing,valky talks for game 0nly out of MP experience...
it all depends on maps..anyway
richness,length,terrain,artifs,exp blahblblahh..
i strongly beleive,most MP maps are waaay too rich anyway.
not so good.its not excactly games fault a barb can kill a whole army alone then.
____________
|
|
Vlaad
Admirable
Legendary Hero
ghost of the past
|
|
posted April 23, 2003 12:49 PM |
|
|
"...a barb can kill a whole army alone then."
But that is the only reason why I still play H4! 
____________
|
|
van
Tavern Dweller
|
|
posted April 23, 2003 04:33 PM |
|
Edited By: van on 23 Apr 2003
|
whoever thinks that heroes are weak:
lvl 1 priest (or any other hero with some form of healing - artefact ,scrols , free skill etc) with 1 angel/phenix only , can wipe all lvl 2 around. With 3-4 angels/phenixes same goes for all lvl 3 around as well.
Lvl 8-10 druid with proper spells dont need even that 1 lvl 4 to do same thing. Only sumoning.
Fighters , both barbs/archers , around lvl 7-8 - same thing. No army needed at all.
Ofcourse, against neutrals. Against human oponent you will need all you have. Lone heroes are not enough.
It seems that single and multy are two very differnt worlds after all.
____________
|
|
Nasty
Known Hero
castor nebun si orb pe cinste
|
|
posted April 23, 2003 09:41 PM |
|
|
i had a hero that could beat up to 16 black dragons...erutan revol at level 28 a think...i cast dragon strenght while fighting 8 black dragons....i had the defence and offence 98....the 8 dragons hit me first and they caused 16 damage...and my hero killed 4 of them with his first blow...and he was an archer(beastmaster)...so the heroes can be extremly powerfull...dont say that a hero cant kill a whole army.
____________
You can trick me with food.Possesions mean nothing to a navajo.
|
|
Thunder
Responsible
Famous Hero
|
|
posted April 23, 2003 10:12 PM |
|
|
Quote:
heh yes,
it all depends on maps..anyway
Seems that Insatiable has gained some greater wisdom after all. But it is not the richness that makes Heroes so powerful.
Creature friendly: Gold Pile & Sword of Gods
Hero friendly: Treasure Chest & Thunder Hammer.
____________
|
|
zordrac
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted April 26, 2003 07:57 AM |
|
|
When I first heard of HOMM4, the big excitement (as expressed on http://www.heroesofmightandmagic.com/) was about the heroes being able to fight alongside the creatures! I had wanted this since HOMM1, as had everyone else I had known who had played the game. To me, this was a necessary part of it. I really liked the way that they did it as well. A part of this, of course, was also having creatures being able to wander by themselves. This is wonderful, and is really what I had wanted in all of the previous versions. Also, while I didn't exactly expect it, it was an added great thing that Heroes could now have advanced classes. This added so much depth. And I for one don't mind how easily a hero can die, because they can also very easily be resurrected after the battle is over. Just take them to a sanctuary, or to a castle. What this does is forces you to have good troops, as well as your good hero.
Using 7 slots, but only 5 recruitable monsters meant for the most part that you had 2 heroes in your army. I started off having one might and one magic hero, but in some cases this changed. The ability to use caravans was another big plus.
However, all in all, I *HATED* that you could not recruit all types of monsters in a town. Quite frankly, I want all that the town has to offer available in each town. It is a nuisance to have to keep 2 of each town type in order to get all of the creatures that you want. And then you run around with 2 different high-level creatures, but only half as many of them as you would like. This is not good. I think that they should go back to the HOMM3 version, on that end. HOMM3 had the creatures situation down pat.
Another thing which I think that they should have done was to have added to the number of creatures. In HOMM3 we had 7 slots, plus your hero. Now we have 7 including your hero? No, we should have 9, giving you room for 2 heroes as well.
Another thing that is extremely frustrating is on scenarios and campaigns where if your hero dies then you lose the game. This is dumb. Your hero can die in any given battle, and its just a matter of resurrecting them. Why not let them die? It forced me to pump up a 2nd hero, who I'd actually force to do the big battles so that my main one wouldn't get killed. And this is really annoying to have to do.
Oh yeah - where are the upgraded creatures? I think that the graphics in HOMM3 were better. Such beautiful creatures with the ArchAngels, the Conflux town, and of course the best town in HOMM3, the Rampart (you got gold....)
____________
|
|
Magus
Hired Hero
Warper of Time-Space
|
|
posted April 27, 2003 03:57 AM |
|
|
Quote:
as was mentioned, Saruman is likely to cast his spells safely inside his castle and not poke his nose into the battlefield. damn right. but then, the next day, he gathers his army and moves on to discover the world -- outside the safety of his castle. and attacks a group of elves on an empty plain in the middle of Gondor. would you say he now also has the option to stand safely aside? the best he can do is climb a tree and hope he wont get shot down. yet better would be to hide behind his trusted golems and maybe cast blur on himself. in any case, heroes must be on the battlefield, because while on travel WHERELSE COULD THEY BE?
True, but if saruman were attacking the elves, he wouldnt be amongst his army when they attacked. He would stay like 1/2 a mile behind his army as they moved in for the attack. I think one idea is to allow them on the battlefield but allow them to go far behind their army, if they so choose. They could be attacked, but only after fighting through the army. they would be out of range for archers, maybe casters as well. If they chose to be in combat, they should be able to use some creatures as a bodyguard. They would be "above" the hero on the stack for protection. You gave the example of Saruman hiding behind his golems yourself
If the army was ambuhed(like attacked by stealthed units) the hero would have no choice
____________
So was the land riven by Chaos and Destruction, and so it was cleansed from existence. I did this, the Magus of Ly'kail, Magus of the Sylvan Kingdoms.
|
|
ThE_HyDrA
Admirable
Famous Hero
The Leader of all Hydras
|
|
posted April 28, 2003 06:30 AM |
|
|
Great Differentiation between the two…..
I have been saying this for the time I’ve been here, Multiplayer Heroes and Single Player Heroes are entirely different games, which encompass differentiating strategies in order to achieve success. While I have played around 10 online games of Heroes, it is not enough experience to match up with the ToH’ers around the Heroes Community. I speak in retrospect of my experiences with Single Player Heroes IV, and more specifically, the Champion difficulty, which, in my opinion, is still quite easy, it just takes slightly longer to complete a map.
On the topic of difficulties, Heroes IV has a lazy system for increasing difficulty. The Champion level is the same as the Advanced level, the only difference being the amount of creatures in a neutral stack on Champion is higher, and you begin with no gold or resources. I have noticed no significant increase of skill concerning the A.I., and the little I’ve seen is probably due to the map I was playing being more A.I. friendly compared to others.
Valkyrica:
“Hydra, obviously you haven't played multiplayer if you state that week 12 a hero will be level 8-9”
In champion difficulty, it is much harder to increase the level of your hero. This is because the armies contain many more creatures, and therefore increasing the chances your hero has to be defeated in combat. Being as weak as they are during the beginning stages (100-120 HP) it is very easy for them to get killed by scores or a company of imps, which is an easy early battle for the champion difficulty.
“you can have black dragons earliest day 5 (very very rich map),”
Even on a very, very rich map, I am in doubt of this occurring, even for multiplayer. The only way I see it happening is that the resources have been handed to you on a platter (I.e. in front of your castle) and you’re playing the easiest difficulty. Are there any maps in the ToH that offer this?
“At level 18,19 a combat hero can kill 10 black dragons with a few immo potions”
This is what I’m trying to get at. No immortality potions. This is in my opinion, a cheap and easy way for NWC to balance the lack of strength of heroes so they can integrate well into the game. I want to get rid of the immortality potions, or at least reduce their frequency greatly. The problem was that Heroes were very weak without immortality potions. Immortality potions just made them last longer in combat, giving players the illusion that they were strong.
Insatiable:
I’m going to agree with your whole post here. Yes, I’m talking out of only single player experience while Valkyrica is speaking out of Multiplayer experience.
It does indeed depend on the resources and artifacts and creatures that you have to face within the map. That is what makes the two game types so different. The maps obviously have different contents.
Vlaad:
Then you won’t want to play Heroes V!
Van:
“Fighters , both barbs/archers , around lvl 7-8 - same thing. No army needed at all. Ofcourse, against neutrals. Against human oponent you will need all you have. Lone heroes are not enough. It seems that single and multy are two very differnt worlds after all.”
Again, I believe it is a case of single player and multiplayer, as you have mentioned at the tail end of your post. Because the hero build-up is so intricate and complex, one will rarely find the correct combination for defeating a creature or army at a low level. A level 8 druid with great spells has no hope of defeating a Titan, for instance. While Nature magic does have distracting spells like Wasp Swarm and Quicksand, there is really not much to attack the Titan with except summoned creatures, which wouldn’t be too strong at level 8.
Nasty:
“erutan revol at level 28 a think...i cast dragon strenght while fighting 8 black dragons....i had the defence and offence 98....the 8 dragons hit me first and they caused 16 damage...”
All I can say is that your hero is very lucky. Also, why would there have been only 16 Black Dragons on their lonesome? Or was there an army there too? If the latter is true, then your hero would have been eliminated fairly early on, since the strength of the opposing hero would have been similar to yours, and would have had the same effect. I also doubt 8 Black Dragons dealing only 16 damage. If you had cast Disrupting Ray and Curse on the BD’s, which you can’t, and Defender and Spiritual Armour on Yourself, which you also couldn’t have since he is a Beastmaster, I don’t see how the BD’s could deal so little damage.
Thunder:
“Creature friendly: Gold Pile & Sword of Gods
Hero friendly: Treasure Chest & Thunder Hammer.”
True, artifacts are also instrumental here, since a hero can become much stronger with the use of an artifact. The Halberd of the Swiftwatch is really quite useful for a might hero, even though it takes up both hands. The Guildmaster’s Compendium or the Mage’s Codex can be extremely useful to an multi-purpose, high level magic hero.
Zordrac:
“I had wanted this since HOMM1, as had everyone else I had known who had played the game. To me, this was a necessary part of it. I really liked the way that they did it as well.”
To be honest, the thought of Heroes in Combat had never crossed my mind until it was officially mentioned for Heroes IV. I however must disagree with you saying the idea was well done. It was poorly implemented, personally, and it could have been done much better. A few features, for example are:
Not as much experience needed at low levels.
No immortality potions
Higher defense rating
Defense increasing every level to increase combat duration
There are probably others, however, they are the only ones I can think of at this moment.
“Also, while I didn't exactly expect it, it was an added great thing that Heroes could now have advanced classes. This added so much depth.”
Quite true. I also liked this idea, and it actually did work well in the game. Although, this came at a cost, since I believe it replaced the individual Hero specialties that were present in Heroes III. When this idea was introduced, I though that the hero specialties would remain, and so, even more depth and complexity could be introduced into the game. But it was not to be. I think many people and players miss this change.
“And I for one don't mind how easily a hero can die, because they can also very easily be resurrected after the battle is over.”
But you should have, since when they were eliminated in battle, there was no experience gained, and then you’re back to square one. It is entirely possible to have a level 1 hero and be entering your second month. This is because the creatures can be overwhelming (In champion at least) and usually they target your slow and vulnerable hero, and make short work of him. Usually 2-3 attacks and the hero is defeated.
“However, all in all, I *HATED* that you could not recruit all types of monsters in a town. Quite frankly, I want all that the town has to offer available in each town.”
Hmmmm. You do indeed have a point, and I wouldn’t really mind which upgrade method they choose for Heroes IV. See here: Heroes V: A New Beginning
All the upgrade systems have their advantages and disadvantages, and this happens to be one of the latter. However, it is not a huge problem for me, since it adds more strategy, having to choose your creature. Some people like it more than others.
“HOMM3 had the creatures situation down pat.”
I’m not entirely sure on this. I would disagree with you for one major reason: It was too difficult to police the upgrades and non-upgrades of a certain type. What made it even more difficult is the creatures could not move by themselves, there were no caravans, and one had to buy a hero in order for the creatures to commute. It was more of a pain organising them into an army, since upgrades and non upgrades did not go together, this meant a secondary army if there was not a Hill Fort in the near surroundings.
“In HOMM3 we had 7 slots, plus your hero. Now we have 7 including your hero? No, we should have 9, giving you room for 2 heroes as well.”
I don’t see a problem with this. It is quite simple, really. 7 in Heroes III for the seven creatures, and seven in Heroes IV, 5 recruitable creatures plus two heroes, it works out very well. Also there are no transportation problems. Also, the ideal number of slots for Heroes III would be 14, but that is too many, and thus leading to problems with creatures (upgraded and not upgraded, etc.)
“Your hero can die in any given battle, and its just a matter of resurrecting them. Why not let them die?”
I agree, this was a difficulty, especially for me in the second map of the Lysander Campaign (True Blade?) since the hero can die easily, and it even affected 2!? Lysander and Proetho. It was difficult, mainly because I played it on champion difficulty.
“Oh yeah - where are the upgraded creatures?”
I actually want them back now. But not in the Heroes III fashion. What I have thought of, is having them done like Heroes II and Heroes IV, where you choose the creatures (You don’t like that, but I do) and some of them have upgrades. One from each of the levels has an upgrade. I direct your attention to this thread again:
Heroes V: A New Beginning
Magus:
“If they chose to be in combat, they should be able to use some creatures as a bodyguard. They would be "above" the hero on the stack for protection.”
Quite an interesting idea here. But I think that the above quote has already been achieved in Heroes IV, where the creatures act as a barrier against the line of sight, and it is a well implemented innovation. Your idea could go well into Heroes IV, except it would require the Hero development system to be revamped. Again.
It is great to see so much interest in this thread, when many of the HC members did not approve greatly of Heroes IV. I happen to be one of the members who is ‘Pro Heroes IV’, for I believe it is better than III.
____________
"Dragons may breathe fire, but Hydras have many heads." - The Creed of Hydras
"As the Dragon drew its breath, the Hydra pounced, swiftly but powerfully, and the Dragon was defeated.”
|
|
zordrac
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted April 28, 2003 10:35 AM |
|
|
Okay, I'll say again in regards to the Heroes dying and being able to be resurrected (and the immortality potion).
Well, in RPGs (which this is supposed to mimic) you can usually cast resurrection on your main characters. Indeed, in HOMM games, you have resurrection, animate dead, and resurrection true for your creatures. So it surely makes sense that you can also do this for your hero. Also, I think that it makes sense to have a sanctuary. Not allowing them to be resurrected in my opinion kills the game. Unless you can think of something better, of course.
I didn't mind your multi-level upgradable units idea, I'll just say. You wrote it somewhere.
____________
|
|
Thorman
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted May 04, 2003 07:00 PM |
|
|
If you need to use immo potions to be able to survive,there is a problem.
Unless they changed the name of the game for:Heroes and Magic and Potions.
Like The_Hydra stated,immo potions were an easy way to "fix" the obvious weaknesses heroes had.
Maybe you enjoy having to gather as many potions as possible before going out,but it's something I refuse to do.That's from a single player gaming experience only.Maybe in MP games you need to use them,cuz your opponents will use them as well,to win a game,but I don't think we should use that to say heroes are "ok".
There is a difference between using spells and stacking 20 potions on a hero.A Hero resurrecting himself is far from a realistic option,even in a fantasy world.
____________
|
|
EmperorSly
Known Hero
Destroyer of Liver
|
|
posted May 06, 2003 05:48 PM |
|
|
potion-lotion...
theres not much use of a hero thats using up all his turns to drink potions (except if he is general). so in that sense nothing unfair with the immortality potions.
____________
|
|
CountZero
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted May 08, 2003 05:09 AM |
|
|
Quote:
potion-lotion...
theres not much use of a hero thats using up all his turns to drink potions (except if he is general). so in that sense nothing unfair with the immortality potions.
I totally agree. I don't care if a hero has 50 imm potions they can only take one per turn, and they cannot do anything else. Therefore all the enemy needs to do is arrange things so that the hero is killed twice in one turn.
Immortality is fine with me, in fact it is the only potion that I would buy.
|
|
Draco
Promising
Famous Hero
|
|
posted May 20, 2003 10:37 PM |
|
|
im my opinion (is that what imo means?) heroes on campains are way too tuff, but on single maps they seem to weak to me. the bigger the map the better they are, but on champion they get less and less experiance for battles, i dont know the percentage but i know on champion you get less exp for battles then hard. and on novice you gets lots of experiance. without upgrade tree's I find it hard on any given level to pass level 20-25, unless of course you wait for battles to get harder and harder.
every time i have to fight magi's or water elementals or madusas, there skills tend to kill my hero. its annoying when 10 madusas get lucky and kill my level 20 hero ending my campaign.
____________
|
|
Dingo
Responsible
Legendary Hero
God of Dark SPAM
|
posted May 27, 2003 03:18 AM |
|
|
weak heroes?
Heroes are weak in the beginning of any scenario, but you can make them undeafable. In this one campagin i had a level 43 ArchMage. I just walked around with him, no creatures. I killed this army with like 25 bone dragons, 35 vamps, 150 cerabi (3 headed dog things) , 400 imps, 250 skeletons, and a level 30 hero. What are you talking about, Heroes are STRONG!
____________
The Above Post/Thread/Idea Is CopyRighted by, The Dingo Corp.
|
|
CountZero
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted May 29, 2003 09:12 AM |
|
|
Dingo is obviously right, heroes can be become incredibly strong. However, the player still must nurture and protect them like babies at first.
But then comes that great moment when they wipe out a stack of Black Dragons with one mighty swipe. Then all the hard work was worth it. Your hero can now go solo, its like your kids leaving home.
Some people say that heroes get too powerful. I just look at it as the payback for all the investment that the player puts into the hero.
Heroes IV is a great game because it allows a player to build up a hero from nothing to be a world beater.
|
|
dushan
Hired Hero
|
|
posted May 29, 2003 10:29 AM |
|
|
I absolutely agree with you, CountZero.
However I find superbarb (all GM) still too powerful. A single superbarb can beat entire army. IMO, his strength lies especially in his GM Magic resistance. I think there should be some kind of 5 level Magic Dampener. Building each level, barb becomes more and more magic resistant. That, of course, would mean dropping magic resistance as a skill. How does Conan gain magic resistance in his adventures? I think Conan hates sorcerers most of all
So, like mages, barb would have to go back to town, from time to time, to gain additional magic resistance (now, barb doesn't have to go back to town at all).
Immortality potions should be more expensive. I think jinxer proposed cost of 5000. It is also very good idea.
____________
|
| |
|
|
