Magicker VS Fighter

[Blackmoon]

Who do you think will win? Of course, with no pre-planned attack.

[Sanvean]

A lot depends on the type, experience, and circumstances. My Whiran offed a templar at one point, but it took some timing, a component, and a little help from her friends to do it.  It's still up there in my top ten playing moments.

[Malifaxis]

I think it should totally be up to the specific circumstance:

Which player is better able to think under stress, and use the environment to advantage.

Tactics.

Unfortunately, that is not how it is.  As it is, the fighter would annihilate.

There is no code based reason to ever have to fear a magicker, unless that magicker is way off the top.

[Rindan]

Well, if it is a skilled warrior and there is absolutely no preplanning or any defensive spells already up, then of course a warrior.  Planning is when a magiker comes in to their own.  I would really not enjoy having a magiker out to get me.  On the other hand, I would really hate to be a magiker who gets caught with his pants down.  A mildly skilled warrior can do some things such that a magiker can not escape or cast with absolutely nothing defensivly a magiker can do about it.  In a fight with no planning, the only way a warrior could loose is through stupidity.  I personally would rather it not be so clear cut when a magiker is the one being surprised, but that is the way the cookie crumbles I suppose.

[wizturbo]

From my limited experience, seems to me that a lot of magickers would have the ability to avoid a fight, slip away and prepare themselves, and then bring the fight to the warrior.  A lot of magick paths talk of powerful defensive barriers, shadows that conceal and what not.  

I would HOPE however, that warriors would fear magickers just in a roleplaying sense, and i'm sure a magicker who survives long enough would be such a force to be reckoned with, coding wise warriors should fear them too.

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

Newbie magickers can kill a newbie warrior. And, visa versa. Thusly, the PC and circumstances dictate the encounter. I voted the Magicker, because any PC I have ever played believes that normally, a magicker will win. And so, I do too.

[Anonymous]

I'd say it depends on the guild, who is trying to trap who and the amount of time played.

Even playing time < 5 days, I give the nod to the warrior, regardless of the magicker's class.  Over 5 days things get dicey for both sides.  After 10 days, watch out if you get a magicker after you.

It's interesting to imagine though, especially when you consider how other guilds might do against magickers.  And it's cool to think that there comes a point with classes other than warrior (who are pretty limited outside of combat) that between any of them and a magicker, the one who is the most patient and the most smartest, is the one who will win.

[adgohan]

Woo, some field I actually have expertise in.

First of all, the MUD has been balanced so that most classes have the potential to be very powerful, even warriors and rangers, if not especially, can be lawnmower men at fifty days, sacking a good 1/4th of an NPC militia before anyone else gets involved that's important.

Unprepared, as in, a warrior that walks into a room and sees a magicker, if the fight begins right there, the magicker will lose straight up, almost every single time. There's a lot of "well that depends" here, including on which type of witch it is, but the ultimate deciding factor is the days played (in melee training) on the fighter and the skill of the witch in question.

A warrior who has trained for one day against a magicker who had "Fighter Slayer" tattooed on his forehead on his 40 day mark is probably going to have a shitload of trouble. It works both ways. When you put two 40 days up against each other, it comes down to player skill, initative, quickness, even typing speed / aliases.

A big thing I want to bring up without going too IC (aka this is in the documents) in an unprepared fight is components. That is, there are some spells that require a component, and do not fire off if you do not have one ready. Thus in an unprepared match, if the witch was without aforementioned component or had no means of getting it in time, the necessary power to knock off a warrior may not be there. With preparation, the witch may jump the warrior with necessary powers and win. It depends on place and time of battle.

In a role playing sense, magickers should be an unknown, feared and depised force. I see someone making a warrior as the background of a witch slayer (short of maybe a dwarven focus) as somewhat unrealistic because this fear should at least be somewhat present in everyone. It's hard to debate, if a witch goes off in a tavern, and you know OOC you can smash them, would you still run because it's the IC thing to do? In my past experience, almost 100% of the time, if a person knows OOC they can take them out, they'll do it, and be "shook up" later. That can be debated on a lot of fronts, I'm not criticizing anyone, it depends pretty consistently on the choice of the player.

Case and point, it depends.

[Dan]

I think the trouble is that too many people know the capabilities of magickers ooc'ly. For it to be a mystery IC it must be one OOC.

[Quirk]

Newbie magickers can kill a newbie warrior.

But only by feeding him poisoned food and then running away very fast.

Magickers aren't really meant to go toe to toe with fighters unprepared, I believe some imm posted in another thread. And well, the newbie magicker is a weak mewling thing easily crushed. I can't think of any circumstance where the newbie magicker would win, even prepared, against a newbie warrior.

A prepared older magicker would have much better chances. I believe the key to magicker survival is in just that - being prepared...

Quirk

[Dyrinis]

I do not know of any fighter PC or mundane NPC that could survive three rounds against the most powerful PC magicker alive today.  While relatively high levels of melee expertise are more commonly seen, the darker recesses of the spell trees hide the most powerful abilities in the game.  It often takes several RL years to reach them.

Dyrinis

[Tamarin]

Well....damn.

[Dakkon Black]

Several RL YEARS!!!... cool !    now I KNOW I'll never get any good spells.  :roll:

[EvilRoeSlade]

I do not know of any fighter PC or mundane NPC that could survive three rounds against the most powerful PC magicker alive today.  While relatively high levels of melee expertise are more commonly seen, the darker recesses of the spell trees hide the most powerful abilities in the game.  It often takes several RL years to reach them.

Dyrinis

That's it, I'm playing another magicker.

He won't last more than 5 days or so, but trivial facts like that won't keep me from daydreaming about the ungodly power I shall gain at the 100 day mark.

[Ix Machina]

I like Black Mage. Everyone knows Fighter is an idiot.

[Wintermute]

The Dwarves will win because they are resistant to Fire and maybe even Fire2.

[spawnloser]

I like Black Mage. Everyone knows Fighter is an idiot.

Swordchucks, YO!

[crymerci]

The Dwarves will win because they are resistant to Fire and maybe even Fire2.

Pssh, that's just their twinkish lack of flammable body hair.

[Twilight]

Thanks to Dyrinis for giving me grand dreams of conquest!

I just have to chip in and say it depends.  The class and race of the elementalist, the relative skill levels of the two, if the mage is lucky and gets a flee off, if the warrior is lucky and knocks out the mage, there is just too much.  I can say I have had 1 day old magickers that I would pit against pretty much any 1 day mundane PC, and quite a few 5 day PCs, based on the NPCs I was killing with that magicker.  I guess I disagree with quite a few people on this point, but a newbie magicker given the right circumstances can gain power much, much more quickly than a melee type.

[Malifaxis]

H1!  I'm n00, but 1 w@nt 2 st@rt a gu1ld of m@g35 wh0 g0 r0und @nd k1ll f1ght3r5.

PM m3 1f 1n+3r35+3d.

kthxby

[Gar]

I put neither because I have no idea.  Most everything I know about magikers is folklore and such.  I've played for a year and had a 20 day character, several 5 day characters and a current 20+ day character.  I have only seen a spell cast once!  Of course, I've played mostly in the north (probably 90%) but magic and magikers have been pretty much non-existant for me.  Sure, I've heard the rumors and talked to people who've supposedly encountered them and all that but my personal experience has been nothing.

[Anonymous]

Wow...I've only played for about 5 months and I've seen a bunch of magick. I guess it depends on the area and if you can get yourself into interesting situations.

A magicker should Ic'ly be able to strike enough fear into a warrior to strike and kill, or else disable the fighter enough to run or kill slowly. But there is always the code that strikes first, fears later. Ic'ly that would happen in a self-confident quick thinking person who would save his skin, and then take a breath.

I've seen a defiler do some mean-a$$ things though, but still, thats a frikkin defiler.

[JollyGreenGiant]

If an "unprepared" warrior had to put on all of his armor before attacking a magicker, the magicker would have plenty of time to pull up various effects.  However, when people refer to an "unprepared" warrior, they generally mean one that is wearing all of his armor and carrying all of his weaponry.  To me, that's the equivalent of a magicker walking around wearing his effects, which isn't what people think of as an "unprepared" magicker.

It comes down to a couple of issues.  I think most magickers, if they're careful with their timing, have the capability to defeat warriors.  But warriors have the advantage, in that they don't really have to take that into consideration - it's just a matter of drawing weapons and beating on the magicker.

One thing that would help with the "timing" issue - consider this.  If some guy in full armor swinging a massive sword comes after unarmed me, the first thing I'm NOT going to do is go swinging fists at him.  I think I'm going to be focusing entirely on keeping out of the way as much as possible.  

So what I'd really like to see is an "avoid" skill, and maybe give it to the less-combative classes.  All the skill does is for a period of time, causes you to not take a swing during combat, gives you a defensive bonus, and treats you like you have a weapon drawn for combat purposes.  It could only be used if both hands are free (diving rolls while wielding, say, a dagger usually end badly), and gives you large penalties to your flee while you have it active.  It'd give a magicker time enough to fire off spells, without having them sit there with both hands empty, taking the beating of a lifetime.

[adgohan]

I really like the idea of the avoid skill. I think it's realistic that if I was coming at someone fully armed, they'd not be focused on swinging back at me automatically. I would certainly be working on dodging and avoiding. I'd like to see some closer forms of martial arts that raise with time or can be practiced, a very good martial artist magicker would probably be pretty dangerous.
Dyrinis brought up an interesting point, I have no doubt that the spells later in the skill tree are incredibly powerful, but I don't see what would stop a sword going through your head from a 50 day warrior no matter who you are.

[Dan]

You also don't see many 50 day warriors though either. I think that its not all about a magicker being able to kill a fighter. I've had magickers tracked down, over mountains, down shield-walls and through caves by fearless warriors of great prowess. My character was the one scared shitless, not the warrior. I think that this sort of thought should change, not the skills of the characters themselves.

[Delirium]

I'd like to see

change stance [offensive|defensive]

Offensive would be your normal attacking stance, the one we all know and love.

Defensive would mean that you do not fight back, and instead, focus soley on dodging and defense. Of course, if you have no weapons, your defense is still going to be pretty crappy.

It could be handy in many situations, from the noble warrior chick refusing to hit back when her lover tries to punch her, to the grizzled old mercenary laughing at some green recruit as the poor sap tries madly to get a hit in, to the oh-so-familiar 'dying in a jail cell' shtick.. the list goes on.


Oh yeah! Uh, magickers. Right. Um. I voted magicker would lose in that circumstance, but I as well think it depends on whether or not the mage is able to react intelligently. Reacting with wits, a semi-experienced mage has got a pretty good chance to at least escape their attacker.

[Rindan]

I really like the idea of the avoid skill. I think it's realistic that if I was coming at someone fully armed, they'd not be focused on swinging back at me automatically. I would certainly be working on dodging and avoiding. I'd like to see some closer forms of martial arts that raise with time or can be practiced, a very good martial artist magicker would probably be pretty dangerous.
Dyrinis brought up an interesting point, I have no doubt that the spells later in the skill tree are incredibly powerful, but I don't see what would stop a sword going through your head from a 50 day warrior no matter who you are.

I can see things that could stop a sword going through your head from a 50 day warrior if you are a magiker.  The bigger issue is that you need to cast said things.  The only reason why I think a magiker would loose is because there is a way a warrior can attack such that a magiker can not, even with the fast triggers in the west, be able to cast before they die.  If a magiker could get off even a single spell at the same time a warrior makes his first attack, I think magikers would be plenty able to defend themselves.  If I could see any one thing added to magikers, it would be the ability to get that one paniced spell off before you die.

[adgohan]

I agree with you there Rindan, there are spell affects in game (hopefully not too IC, sorry if it is) that would help a magicker in melee..not to name anything specific.

However, I think that without those aforementioned abilities a magicker is pretty much equivilant to an unarmed merchant guild. Maybe you're suggesting some type of code that allows a magicker to keep his calm and be able to cast during the heat of battle or while still being beat on? In previous instances, I've had problems with this, but might just be field of expertise.

The avoid skill is essentially a good idea to lesser combative questions as JGG mentioned. Rindan, could you elaborate a bit more on what you mean? (Asking Rindan to elaborate kind of scares me, by the way.)

[__Torax__]

I'd have to say the Magicker would win....

All he has to do is say, "*POOF* Your a rat."

I dont know to many warriors that can fight as a rat...

[Angela Christine]

So what I'd really like to see is an "avoid" skill, and maybe give it to the less-combative classes.  All the skill does is for a period of time, causes you to not take a swing during combat, gives you a defensive bonus, and treats you like you have a weapon drawn for combat purposes.  It could only be used if both hands are free (diving rolls while wielding, say, a dagger usually end badly), and gives you large penalties to your flee while you have it active.  It'd give a magicker time enough to fire off spells, without having them sit there with both hands empty, taking the beating of a lifetime.

Interesting.  This reminds me of the footage of that lawyer avoiding getting shot by hiding behind a tree.  For those of you that missed it, some disgruntaled guy went to a  courthouse to act out his disgruntlment with a pistol.  He was trying to shoot a lawyer, so the lawyer ducks behind a tree.  The shooter is 3 feet from the lawyer, but the lawyer dodges around to keep the tree between them.  Everytime the shooter gets his gun up to fire, the lawyer's head and torso are on the other side of the tree.  I think the lawyer did get hit a few times, but he wasn't seriously injured.  Knowing that no one got hurt, it was funny as hell to watch.  I felt sorry for the tree though.

This would be similar to the avoid skill, I think.  The lawyer didn't try to run away because he didn't want to get shot in the back.  He didn't try to attack the shooter, because he believed fists would not be effective against a pistol at point blank range.  Instead he put all his energy into using the terrain as a sheild, and dodging like a crazed jozhal to avoid getting hit.  

Obviously this isn't a good long-term stratagy.  Eventually you need to do something, have someone rescue you, or hope the attacker's weapon stops working.  A gun eventually runs out of bullets, but  a sword keeps working until it breaks.  If there are several attackers the avoiding won't be as effective.  This isn't going to work for a long time, but it could buy you a minute or two to gather your wits and decide what to do.

AC

[Bogre]

There should be more defensive options open to a magicker.

Perhaps a magicker of sufficient discipline and training could prepare a spell beforehand, like the 'Readied spell' feat. But have it a moderately not starting skill. This would allow a magicker to release the spell with a short command ex: 'unleash'  :shock: or have it set to react when :is attacked-bashed-backstabbed-runs low on health/stamina/stun etc.

I think this would be a better option than the reflexive magick, because it would be more balanced, but create a nice level of options, and not say -you must have reflective magick each time-

A powerful krathian releasing a fireball whenever he gets init'd on sounds overpowered to me. However, a powerful krathian uttering a word and immolating a person while he flees sounds good.

Perhaps give magickers a 'combat casting' skill, like D&D.

[Carnage]

I'm not 100% sure if this is implemented as it's been a while since I played a magicker but maybe do two things:

1.)Make obvious offensive/defensive spells faster to cast. A fireball spell and a shield spell perhaps go off faster than healing or making water or whatever.

2.)Make it so that as you get better at a spell, you cast faster. Start maybe a bit slower than spells are now at wek and then have them be much faster to cast than they are now at mon. You're better at a spell so I'd presume you would know it better. Do it so it checks the skill in relation to what level you're casting at.

For example, casting wek (the lowest) with mon skill (the highest) is super fast. Casting mon with mon skill isn't as fast however.

[Tlaloc]

Delay:
  After, corresponds directly with proficiency in casting the spell.

[JollyGreenGiant]

Delay:
  After, corresponds directly with proficiency in casting the spell.

Let me see if I understand this correctly.  Let's say there are three elements to a command.  You enter the command, the command executes, and there is the possibility of delay.  If a command has Delay: After, then the order looks something like this - Enter, Execute, Delay.  If a command has Delay: Before, then the order looks something like this - Enter, Delay, Execute.

Saying that cast is of type Delay: After would seem to imply that a magicker could hammer out, say, a fireball instantly, but then expect some downtime immediately following the execution of the effect.  My experience with casting has been exactly the opposite - the command is entered, delay occurs, then the command executes - more like the Delay: Before type.

I guess what I'm asking is if the delay is listed incorrectly in the helpfile, or if something else is afoot.

[creeper386]

The command is cast. The delay isn't before cast. When you type cast whatever, the cast command goes in immediately. Then there is a delay. Then there is the effect.

The delay is more where in the cue does the command enter. Does the command enter AFTER a delay or before a delay? I'm pretty sure the acctually effect the command differs.

I'd consider casting spells alot like the craft command. I'd say the delay on the craft command is after. Even though it's before the effect.

Creeper

[naatok]

I've played every available guild on Arm except Psionicist.  I enjoy playing straight warriors, but my favorite guild is, unfortunately 'sorcerer'.

Why is that unfortunate?, you may ask.  Well, because I am fascinated by the incredibly complex magick code that has been implimented on ArmageddonMud, and also fascinated by the IC story of magick in Zalanthas.

How is that unfortunate?, you may ask.

Because every single well-played magick users I've done, with the exception of one (and even in that case it was saved by pity and plans), I have somehow manged to get killed in the most stupid of ways.

Since the advent of Karma, and the subsequent restructuring of guilds and races, every single mage of note that I've played has died because of something stupid I did...or didn't do as a player.  None were just outright killed by others....and none of them by other pcs.

What IS good about this is that I have NO fear of you big, bad warrior types out there when I'm playing my vile sorcerers and what-not.  

This warrior vs mage discussion is rather like the juvenile
'Batman/Superman.  Who would kick whose butt?'

The hard truth of the matter is that a high-end warrior, no matter how many mekillots s/he eats for breakfast a day, is no where NEAR the league of a high end sorcerer....or even some elementalists.

There are many reasons for this, which I won't go into detail on.  Suffice it to say that a uber-mage has many more offensive/defensive techniques at his disposal than an uber-warrior....and many of those techniques don't involve so-called 'battle spells' one iota.  It is all a matter of staying alive to discover the secret buried treasures of knowledge, bruthas an' sistahs.

No!  I'm not talking about hidden tomes of magick, or items or shit!  I'm talking about the rewards of IC years....perhaps DECADES....of research and practice.

In the immortal words of 'Switch' from the Matrix.  "Take my advice.  When you see an.." [old mage]"..you do what we do.  You run.  You run your ass off."

Unfortunately, it isn't as easy to run and avoid mages in Zalanthas as it is to avoid Agents in the Matrix.  I won't even go into the difficulties of discovering when they are there....watching your every move.  :twisted:

[Stroker]

In the words of 'Mouse' from the Matrix: " Pay no attention to these hypocrites, to deny ourselves our desires is to deny the very thing that makes us human." (I know the first part's word for word, but the rest is shaky).

I shall play a Psionist then so I can say that I've played something you haven't.

[Malifaxis]

Batman would so kick Superman's ass.

[Stroker]

You know how there is Captain America, I wonder if there's Captain Soviet.

[Malifaxis]

Who's Your Czar?

You can either thank me, or build a gulag and name it after me.  Your choice.

To anyone not Dirr:  If you enjoy comics, and have an appreciation for fine art, you should check this out.

----

Back to the topic, however.

I agree with the 'mages with the scary wicked powers will toast your butt' line of logic.  But the main deal is that I would make an outside ballpark guess that one out of every five hundred mage characters generated actually gets within spitting distance of those scary wicked powers.

And that until you get scary wicked powers, you are one drunken bynner with an attitude away from the mantis.