Tip.It Times Presents: Completing the Triangle

[Myweponsg00d]

The RuneScape combat triangle has 4 sides to it.

 

Summoning, as it can be used for each style of combat, Jagex said so themselves :)

Thats rubbish. When you summon something it fights in melee or ranged or magic type attacks and thus is not a fourth side to the triangle.

 

So what the hell is summoning defense for?

 

 

 

 

 

I think fixing magic is a simple fix: make staffs have higher magic attack bonus. It would give pure magic users a huge edge. Theres not nearly enough of a punishment for using a melee weapon in your hand slot instead of a staff.

[Huta]

Have to be honest... the combat triangle isn't as clear cut as everyone makes it and Ts_stormrage jumped in with the others and tried to make it seem so.

 

 

 

It isn't simply Range Vs mage vs melee. The problem arises with equipment and weapon bonuses. Mages generate most of there magic attack bonus from robes. Melee players generate it mostly from weapons. Range is a mix of the two.

 

This puts us at a tangent of sorts with the melee who wears ranger armour and the mage who uses a melee weapon. Both SHOULD infact beat eachother. They have weapons to cut through the opponents gear. The mage has an option should the melee swap to his own style gear to combat the melee weapon. Whereas generally the meleers does more damage with his weapon against mage robes than the mage with the melee weapon will do against ranger gear. (Imagine a guy with ahrims + whip fighting a guy with dhide and whip). The dis-advantages suffered by the mage change as soon as he or the melee'r change attack style. The mage option to mage instead of melee, whereas the meleer choosing to fully range. Hybrids mess up these clear cut set ups :)

 

 

 

Either way... nobody liked my did you know? :(

 

 

 

blah blah blah, mage hits hard cuz it killed me

 

 

 

I say mage melee and range are indeed even

 

 

 

That right there is so ridiculous it's almost not worth addressing. Magic and Ranged are nowhere near even. Just plain counting the dps possible - 30 max at slow speed for magic, vs. ko abilities and massive damage with special effects with crossbows. Heck, the other day I hit a 28 with unenchanted rune bolts with my measly 79 ranged - that's almost max what I can hit with my mage cape.

 

 

 

I can easily out eat a mage. No sweat, even without prayer. While it's true damage isn't everything, when you add in all the other negative factors magic is on the very bottom. It's inaccurate, low damage, with no ko, weak armor, and for an extra little kick in the nuts it has an extremely high cost of use.

 

 

 

You may have never fought a decent tank ranger, but I have. They can get whiplike accuracy while stacking around +300 slash def, high damage, with effective ko options and a nice set of special effects. A tank ranger has a slight disadvantage against melee, but they're fully capable at killing a meleer. A mage doesn't have a [bleep]ing chance against a ranger, it's almost ludicrous to watch how fast they go down. And as I've proved time and time again, a tank ranger almost always has a better chance of killing a fully armored meleer than a mage has of killing an effective meleer.

 

 

 

Now that is just plain wrong.

 

 

 

lord_troyus, a meleer in hides is not a hybrid. Hybrid doesn't refer to armor, it refers to using multiple forms of attack. A warrior in black hides is still a warrior.

 

 

 

And honestly, even in the hybrids game, other than the utility in teleblock or ice, a hybrid that uses magic alongside another class is weaker than say, a range/melee hybrid. Magic just doesn't pull its own weight, it's the weak link in the triangle.

[mrdoctorsir]

lol i like how you edited that =P?

 

do range and melee have as many specials as mage? thats what supposed to make up for hits

 

and it is true with what you say about melee and range being able to hit higher, but as i said they don't have the special ability options

 

it might not quite make up for it but mage isn't completely underpowered as you say it is

 

but you can say you can "out eat" a mage but sorry i haven't seen that and that's all I'm saying

 

 

 

 

 

please know one take offense to what I said its my opinion and that's all

 

 

 

also mages aren't supposed to be good against range -triangle- mages aren't supposed to have high defence they are purely offense

 

I agree a ranger can take down a mager with relative ease but its supposed to be that way

[Doomster]

Not sure the Great Orb project works in the context it is mentioned - if you made and used enough runes to get to GOP, you would have quite a mage level.

[lord_troyus]

Okay my return?

 

 

 

 

 

That right there is so ridiculous it's almost not worth addressing. Magic and Ranged are nowhere near even. Just plain counting the dps possible - 30 max at slow speed for magic, vs. ko abilities and massive damage with special effects with crossbows. Heck, the other day I hit a 28 with unenchanted rune bolts with my measly 79 ranged - that's almost max what I can hit with my mage cape.

 

 

 

Yeah that may be true. But you don't hit that damage with that speed AND hold the enemy for 20 seconds do you? No. Mage doesn't KO, its holds the enemy till you drain there food. You obviously fight near banks or safespots (On the new pvp, or low level in the old wildy, near the wall in bh) as otherwise it wouldn't be a problem for you.

 

 

 

I can easily out eat a mage. No sweat, even without prayer. While it's true damage isn't everything, when you add in all the other negative factors magic is on the very bottom. It's inaccurate, low damage, with no ko, weak armor, and for an extra little kick in the nuts it has an extremely high cost of use.

 

 

 

 

Wow that is so very wrong. If magic was at the bottom WHY is it the dominating factor in single combat teams on P2P? You hold them, you blast them, you stop them from teleporting. Yeah you probably could do more damage with melee or range but you don't get the effects. You would have less time to do the damage, you wouldn't completely hold your opponent would you?

 

 

 

 

 

You may have never fought a decent tank ranger, but I have. They can get whiplike accuracy while stacking around +300 slash def, high damage, with effective ko options and a nice set of special effects. A tank ranger has a slight disadvantage against melee, but they're fully capable at killing a meleer. A mage doesn't have a [bleep] chance against a ranger, it's almost ludicrous to watch how fast they go down. And as I've proved time and time again, a tank ranger almost always has a better chance of killing a fully armored meleer than a mage has of killing an effective meleer.

 

 

 

I would consider myself a decent tank ranger. Yeah they are built to win against mages and other rangers. Thats why teams use them to protect the mages against other people (than those the mage is killing). As for the second part that i've bolded out... No way. Thats completely wrong. Ask anyone who has an ounce of knowledge about player versus player and they would tell you that.

 

 

 

Now that is just plain wrong.

 

 

 

lord_troyus, a meleer in hides is not a hybrid. Hybrid doesn't refer to armor, it refers to using multiple forms of attack. A warrior in black hides is still a warrior.

 

 

 

 

Sorry for trying to put an applicable description on the warrior to set him apart from the average. Yes i was wrong, but i was merely trying to convey the point he was different.

 

 

 

And honestly, even in the hybrids game, other than the utility in teleblock or ice, a hybrid that uses magic alongside another class is weaker than say, a range/melee hybrid. Magic just doesn't pull its own weight, it's the weak link in the triangle.

 

 

 

Couldn't be more wrong. Its the complete opposite. A melee/range hybrid has no possible way to control the movement of the enemy like any of the mage options. Over the short term and for KO ability its more effective but overall considering the time held, the options the mage hybrid would have after holding them (Using melee or range) to the same effect gives it a supreme advantage.

 

 

 

Your statements draw on false opinions and from that you generate a completely skewed conclusion.

[mrdoctorsir]

you make some extremely good points lord troyus

 

mage makes up for power with abilities

 

mage and melee go better together than range and melee because like you said a meleer can control a battle easier

 

and thank you for agreeing that you can't out eat a mage that's completely impossible

[Chungus99]

meh i'm f2p (planning on getting mems as soon as i can slack off from school, preferably near the end of senior year of high school) so i can't have a say in all this members mumbo jumbo (yes, i do understand what you guys are talking about)

 

 

 

but in my experience of the game, mage is an inaccurate but strong side of the triangle, with additional effects such as freeze. this makes useful for those annoyers out there =)

 

 

 

but besides that, i don't see a use for mage in 1v1 PKing (IN F2P, don't flame me for this)

[Ciabelle]

interesting article, somehow it never occured to me to try and have 2 tele rooms in my POH, that'll be nice.

 

Quite handy! I have my home in Yanille (eliminating the need for a Watchtower Portal) Directly in front of the default garden/portal one gets, I have a quest hall (Glory at the ready in first room) To the immediate east are the three teleports to the east (Varrock, Canifis, Lumbridge) and to the immediate west I have the western teleports. (Camelot, Ardougne, Falador)

 

 

 

I pretty much razed my entire house once I got a high enough level to build most rooms I wanted, and planned it very carefully to get teleports, altars, and such very close access, while throwing the less useful rooms (bedrooms, throne rooms, etc.) off to the back, yet keeping a very balanced, neat layout.. Unfortunately, the design I made put the formerly useless telescope against a wall, so I ended up adding another study to the west of my garden/portal just for use in the shooting stars. It's convenient, but totally ruins the efficient aesthetic I was going for. Oh well, soon I'll blow even more money redoing the house yet again! Grrr!

 

Also, the PS made me laugh ;)

Glad someone got the joke. Still scratching my head on that one.. Master of Science in Social Work? Magneto-Static Surface Wave? Mission Specific SoftWare? Multi-Site Steel War? Google isn't even helping me figure that one out I'm afraid.

 

 

 

EDIT: Okay, the latter one is the reference. Still don't get it. Guess you've got to be into PvP.. Never heard the term before..

[Huta]

lol i like how you edited that =P?

 

do range and melee have as many specials as mage? thats what supposed to make up for hits

 

and it is true with what you say about melee and range being able to hit higher, but as i said they don't have the special ability options

 

it might not quite make up for it but mage isn't completely underpowered as you say it is

 

but you can say you can "out eat" a mage but sorry i haven't seen that and that's all I'm saying

 

 

 

 

 

please know one take offense to what I said its my opinion and that's all

 

 

 

also mages aren't supposed to be good against range -triangle- mages aren't supposed to have high defence they are purely offense

 

I agree a ranger can take down a mager with relative ease but its supposed to be that way

 

 

 

The only thing magic has over the other classes is ice/entangle and tb. That's all. A couple utility spells that do nothing to balance the class out. Sure, if you're pking with your friends you'll want a mage with you. But when it comes to being its own class, it's ineffective.

 

 

 

Sure, hybrids dominate. But the deal is a warrior, fighting just as a warrior, can still be effective. A ranger, fighting just as a ranger, can still be effective. A mage, fighting just as a mage, is a free kill. A mage may not be supposed to have the edge on a ranger, but they should at least stand a chance, the same way a ranger has a solid chance of beating melee if geared properly.

 

 

 

If any mage thinks they're up to it, I'll deathmatch you in the duel arena, melee on magic. Let's see if you can succeed where 15 other 99 mages have failed.

 

 

 

 

Yeah that may be true. But you don't hit that damage with that speed AND hold the enemy for 20 seconds do you? No. Mage doesn't KO, its holds the enemy till you drain there food. You obviously fight near banks or safespots (On the new pvp, or low level in the old wildy, near the wall in bh) as otherwise it wouldn't be a problem for you.

 

 

 

 

Which makes it good as a sidearm or to have a mage friend if you're pking in a group. That doesn't change anything. My last duel with a mage, we fought for a freakin' 15 minutes non stop, the mage splashing around 70% of the time and the other half hitting for an average of around 16 damage. (Without prayer). Who won? I did. All it took was a lucky pair of 40+ hits.

 

 

 

And bottom line, wearing people out DOESN'T get kills. Ko's do. Until magic gets its own KO, it's going to be subpar as its own class and is going to continue in its oldschool RSC role.

 

 

 

 

Wow that is so very wrong. If magic was at the bottom WHY is it the dominating factor in single combat teams on P2P? You hold them, you blast them, you stop them from teleporting. Yeah you probably could do more damage with melee or range but you don't get the effects. You would have less time to do the damage, you wouldn't completely hold your opponent would you?

 

 

 

Once again, utility. Utility doesn't mean balance. It's a nice thing to have, essential to a group, but it just still isn't balanced.

 

 

 

I would consider myself a decent tank ranger. Yeah they are built to win against mages and other rangers. Thats why teams use them to protect the mages against other people (than those the mage is killing). As for the second part that i've bolded out... No way. Thats completely wrong. Ask anyone who has an ounce of knowledge about player versus player and they would tell you that.

 

 

 

Your tank ranger stats are ok, but not enough to talk about. A solid tank ranger with max stats does surprising well against melee. Melee holds the edge, like it should, but they're definitely not a pushover. That part of the triangle is balanced. Magic vs range, tho, is absolutely no contest.

 

 

 

And please, don't try the "I know more about pvp than you do kthxbai" line, because you really don't want to get shot down that bad.

 

 

 

Sorry for trying to put an applicable description on the warrior to set him apart from the average. Yes i was wrong, but i was merely trying to convey the point he was different.

 

 

 

"Now that is just plain wrong" was referring to my previous comment about tank rangers, not you.

 

 

 

Couldn't be more wrong. Its the complete opposite. A melee/range hybrid has no possible way to control the movement of the enemy like any of the mage options. Over the short term and for KO ability its more effective but overall considering the time held, the options the mage hybrid would have after holding them (Using melee or range) to the same effect gives it a supreme advantage.

 

 

 

Sorry, but that's right. The range/melee hybrid has more damage, no weaknesses, and will absolutely school a melee or range and magic hybrid. While that range/melee hybrid is froze down, the other hybrid (sitting in probably 150 or less range def) is getting turned into a pincushion. The mage hybrid can always try to close in for melee, but once again, he's in inferior armor. No matter what he fights with, he's at a major disadvantage. Ice is nice, but KOs and damage win fights. A good dbow, ags, or dds spec or even a lucky hit with a dstone bolt could end the fight as fast as it started, and the chances of one of those going off are much higher when you're fighting someone wearing a skimpy armor with ahrim parts in it.

 

 

 

Magic is nothing more than a class that works well in a group but is inferior everywhere else.

 

 

 

What magic needs is a new spellbook. Single target, high damage, high accuracy, completely with a special attack on the staff. Something that brings mages back into play on the 1v1 scale. It leaves Ancient magic where it is now, a group and utility spellbook, while giving mages an effective spellbook that increases their chances against both melee and range when pking by themselves.

[mrdoctorsir]

They certainly do help balance it out 20 seconds is a lot of time in an actual fight namely in a 1on 1 fight that's enough time to get a few hits in and those hits can be critical to a fight

 

i'm not saying mage is flawless but the power behind is supposed to be able to make up for the defense, and as i've said in many messages now

 

-mage is purely offensive

 

 

 

I agree mage defense is weak, but i disagree that the offensive abilities of mage are weak, and thats a point i want to make clear, and that's why you say mage is weak, because mage DEFENSE needs re-done not attacks/strength

 

the thing about the contest between ,age and range, is true

 

-the point of mage is not to get hit, magers can get hit while fighting a ranger and that's why they get "destroyed"

 

I disagree with mage needing a new spell book, but that would almost ruin the triangle, maybe i could agree with another spell book IF it makes it almost EXACTLY like range, but then again why would we need 2 versions of range? that's alot like your suggesting, or at least it sounds like to me

 

 

 

p.s. i like that no matter what i say you do have some logic about your arguments lol gives me something to think about =P

[lord_troyus]

If any mage thinks they're up to it, I'll deathmatch you in the duel arena, melee on magic. Let's see if you can succeed where 15 other 99 mages have failed.

 

Thats pretty arrogant. Besides if you were pure melee in pure melee gear you would be beaten by an ancient mage. Would get 3 times the amounts of hits off.

 

 

 

 

 

Yeah that may be true. But you don't hit that damage with that speed AND hold the enemy for 20 seconds do you? No. Mage doesn't KO, its holds the enemy till you drain there food. You obviously fight near banks or safespots (On the new pvp, or low level in the old wildy, near the wall in bh) as otherwise it wouldn't be a problem for you.

 

 

 

 

Which makes it good as a sidearm or to have a mage friend if you're pking in a group. That doesn't change anything. My last duel with a mage, we fought for a freakin' 15 minutes non stop, the mage splashing around 70% of the time and the other half hitting for an average of around 16 damage. (Without prayer). Who won? I did. All it took was a lucky pair of 40+ hits.

 

 

 

Congratulations. Im sure that you take a huge amount of pride in beating this person.

 

 

 

 

 

And bottom line, wearing people out DOESN'T get kills. Ko's do. Until magic gets its own KO, it's going to be subpar as its own class and is going to continue in its oldschool RSC role.

 

 

 

Okay. Up till around level 30 combat mage dominant with KO moves. As for the wearing people out.. thats utter BS. Majority of decent kills (by that i mean full ahrims, full karils tank gear, fury, seer ring etc) are claimed in that exact way. Just because a few meleers get a lucky KO from a GS or dharoks.. thats lucky. Draining someone for 10 levels of wilderness isn't.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Wow that is so very wrong. If magic was at the bottom WHY is it the dominating factor in single combat teams on P2P? You hold them, you blast them, you stop them from teleporting. Yeah you probably could do more damage with melee or range but you don't get the effects. You would have less time to do the damage, you wouldn't completely hold your opponent would you?

 

 

 

Once again, utility. Utility doesn't mean balance. It's a nice thing to have, essential to a group, but it just still isn't balanced.

 

 

 

You're very narrow minded. I never said it was balanced. I think mage is slightly overpowered especially with the recent spells with the new staff.

 

 

 

I would consider myself a decent tank ranger. Yeah they are built to win against mages and other rangers. Thats why teams use them to protect the mages against other people (than those the mage is killing). As for the second part that i've bolded out... No way. Thats completely wrong. Ask anyone who has an ounce of knowledge about player versus player and they would tell you that.

 

 

 

Your tank ranger stats are ok, but not enough to talk about. A solid tank ranger with max stats does surprising well against melee. Melee holds the edge, like it should, but they're definitely not a pushover. That part of the triangle is balanced. Magic vs range, tho, is absolutely no contest.

 

 

 

And please, don't try the "I know more about pvp than you do kthxbai" line, because you really don't want to get shot down that bad.

 

 

 

I never tried the "I know more than you". But you are extremely narrow minded. I myself think rangers do own mages is most cases. As above i said... they are built to.

 

 

 

 

 

Sorry for trying to put an applicable description on the warrior to set him apart from the average. Yes i was wrong, but i was merely trying to convey the point he was different.

 

 

 

"Now that is just plain wrong" was referring to my previous comment about tank rangers, not you.

 

 

 

Im fine with that, i meant about the loose meaning of the term hybrid i used.

 

 

 

Couldn't be more wrong. Its the complete opposite. A melee/range hybrid has no possible way to control the movement of the enemy like any of the mage options. Over the short term and for KO ability its more effective but overall considering the time held, the options the mage hybrid would have after holding them (Using melee or range) to the same effect gives it a supreme advantage.

 

 

 

Sorry, but that's right. The range/melee hybrid has more damage, no weaknesses, and will absolutely school a melee or range and magic hybrid. While that range/melee hybrid is froze down, the other hybrid (sitting in probably 150 or less range def) is getting turned into a pincushion. The mage hybrid can always try to close in for melee, but once again, he's in inferior armor. No matter what he fights with, he's at a major disadvantage. Ice is nice, but KOs and damage win fights. A good dbow, ags, or dds spec or even a lucky hit with a dstone bolt could end the fight as fast as it started, and the chances of one of those going off are much higher when you're fighting someone wearing a skimpy armor with ahrim parts in it.

 

 

 

Unless we're sitting in the duel arena or stood next to the bank thats so unbelievably rubbish. Yeah the range/melee would own in part. But more often that not the mage starts with a great spec to lower the opponent down to low hp. Starts brewing to actually survive, running trying to save gear. In practise your strategies only work in a no risk situation.

 

 

 

Magic is nothing more than a class that works well in a group but is inferior everywhere else.

 

 

 

What magic needs is a new spellbook. Single target, high damage, high accuracy, completely with a special attack on the staff. Something that brings mages back into play on the 1v1 scale. It leaves Ancient magic where it is now, a group and utility spellbook, while giving mages an effective spellbook that increases their chances against both melee and range when pking by themselves.

 

 

 

Are you out of your mind? Already with the ability to slow down the attack of an enemy to half the current speed, hold them for 20 seconds and do damage in 1 spell you wan't to improve that? On members magic is over-powered when in a risky situation. They have more chances to get away than the enemy. Yeah i'll agree that in F2P it is blown out of the water in all (Mid-high level) combat.

 

 

 

But the major factor you are forgetting is this. Mages can often wear robes with insane attack bonus's at 20 def. Thats 5 combat levels extra. The magic stat doesn't effect combat level asmuch as melee does. So as soon as that mage has 82 magic for ice blitz, meleers of that combat level don't stand a chance.

 

 

 

Even range tanks have trouble at that level.

 

 

 

I think the main problem we have here is the location. When you think pking - you think edgeville (old wild) or near banks etc. Remember in the old wilderness that edgeville wildy was only a small part of it. Anywhere above level 10-15 and mage hybrids ruled. They still do.

[Huta]

I never tried the "I know more than you". But you are extremely narrow minded. I myself think rangers do own mages is most cases. As above i said... they are built to.

 

 

 

Yes, they are built to, but no to the degree they do.

 

 

 

Congratulations. Im sure that you take a huge amount of pride in beating this person.

 

 

 

I was just proving a point.

 

 

 

I think mage is slightly overpowered especially with the recent spells with the new staff.

 

 

 

Honestly, I would say if they increased the accuracy of ancient magic a bit, and made the new spells readily available instead of tieing the new spells to a perma-degrading 10m staff that lasts one hour (while putting some controls on it to prevent hybriding with the new spells), ancient magic might be able to stand on its own. It would still need a ko, but that would be a lot better off than it is now. Instead of copying the other classes and simply increasing damage, mages would be effective at reducing the other person's damage output.

 

 

 

As it stands now, though, that spell is almost never seen ingame. You might see one mage using it in high stakes pvp world clan battles, or once a year in BH by a hybrid which then switches to melee or range, but with pvp the way it is now, and the loss of staking, pvp doesn't give good enough of rewards to be worth risking a staff like that, nice as its effects are. And right now, magic needs something.

 

 

 

If instead of that, they release a new spellbook, I'd go 10 second max binds, with single target spells that can hit up to 40, and a simple dds-style ko on the staff. Accuracy would have to be high enough to hit rangers enough to give them a run for their money, while melee would still have a chance (though still disadvantaged) if the mage misses one bind, messes up his timing, or during the 4 second immunity after the bind wears off. The mage has high enough damage to be competitive, plus the ko option they need.

 

 

 

Either of these would work. Honestly, I believe a new spellbook (or an expansion on modern elemental magic) would be the better choice, but I'd be happy with slightly better accuracy and ready availability on the Miasmic spells.

[mrdoctorsir]

No offense but please stop suggesting the new spell book.... the problems not power it's defense, the big complaint is defense, the reason why a mage can get taken down so easily? it's defense no matter how many times i say it it's all in the defense of armor, it shouldn't be spells, it should be armor

 

a new spell changes a lot more than anyone thinks, jagex themselves releases something new, they know what will generally happen but, they are not sure about exactly what will happen, armor would cause the least repercussions, compared to a new spell

[Huta]

So the mage gets the tank ability of a ranger. Woop de do, we have a clone with 30% less damage, horrible accuracy and no ko.

 

 

 

The miasmic spells are a soft of offensive armor, which is something if expanded on and controlled could fix mages. A mage shouldn't be a tank, it should be a debuffer.

 

 

 

Not to mention, if the new ancient spells were made more available, a mage would actually have a use in monster hunting, instead of just range and melee.

[mrdoctorsir]

well yes if there was a controlled release it would work much better

 

but if you think about it you'll just be copying range attack though if there is lack of abilities and it can hit higher

 

neither suggestions would work well with out ruining the combat triangle

 

you can't increase attack power without making draw backs(reducing or getting rid of special abilities) that makes it more like range

 

you can't add armor without ruining the pure offensive abilities of mage

 

there's almost nothing you can do to mage at this point, there's to many developments in the game

 

 

 

also i don't know what i was or wasn't thinking suggesting armor

[Robot919]

Mage is the most expensive combat skill overall, and still deals the least amount of damage. Melee, there are godswords. Sure they cost a lot, but they don't degrade or anything, and they can deal heavy damage. (70+). Range, there's darkbow, which can deal over 80 damage with its spec! And, also, broad-tipped bolts. Can deal 25+ damage, and they are pretty cheap. And then there's mage. The best spell, ice barrage, can deal 30 damage to 9 people, but what are the chances of that happening? Also, it's 2k per cost, which is pretty expensive. And for all of you saying miasmic barrage is overpowered, it freezes for 48 seconds, think about the cost of the staff. It's 7.5 mil for one hour... And the 15 minute staff costs 900k. I mean, sure it can do some good damage, but it rots away in no time. Also, take into account that mage is the only combat skill where there is no special attack. Range has magic shortbow, magic longbow, dark bow, seercull, etc. Melee has godswords, dds, d long, d scim, dragon 2 h, granite maul, anchor, etc etc. Magic has none. Zero. Zip. Zilch.

[lord_troyus]

Huta - i like the idea of a new spellbook (Although mage is already very in-depth).

 

 

 

As for the KO spell... thats an okay idea. But it would have to be on a completely different spellbook and i'm not sure if it would be used alot. I think the idea of holding them and wearing them down suits the mage role. If it were given a KO spell, not many hybrids would use it - mainly due to magic accuracy being an issue with hybrid set-ups.

[aerendil]

LOL, i never use magic exept for alching monster drops, its too expensive....

 

 

 

Meamzed

[Dirkmetal]

Lets add in another triangle breaking factor: The ZGS, that ruins about 70% of the arguments saying that magics hold spells are powerful, now they are NOTHING.

 

 

 

There is not one thing if your in a non-PvP world that magic can do that can't be nullified, and that's why it needs a Ko. Lowering stats; restore pot, Poison; Anti-poison, Hold; ZGS spec. Its just a bunch of fluff.

 

 

 

Lets look at the crafting skills behind each combat skill.

 

Melee has Smithing; Hard and costly but once you have the finished product there no need to make more, no risk.

 

Range has Fletching; Considered the easiest skill in the game, you can mass produce thousands of arrows in a short time with out ever leaving the bank, no risk.

 

Magic has Runecrafting; Considered the second hardest skill in the game, medium risk of dying because you have to run through the wild AND the abyss wile skulled.

 

So magic has the hardest resource skill, oh boy lucky us.

 

 

 

Also magic is still useless in monster hunting.

 

 

 

High price + no Ko + weak armor + all effects can be nullified (ono pvp worlds) + no weapon to use (better for hybreds then normal players) + hard to unlock (hard quests) = Epic eail

[Fairness]

 

Magic has Runecrafting; Considered the second hardest skill in the game, medium risk of dying because you have to run through the wild AND the abyss wile skulled.

 

 

 

 

No, you don't.

[lord_troyus]

Tb can't be nullified unless entering a safezone. Also the miasmic (sp?) effect can't be undone.