Battlemage: heavy armor?

[Gyrmadet]

Aside from movement speed, is there any other kind of penalty for using an heavy armor on mage?
I ask 'cause the game itself is heavily "d&d inspired" and, as you may happen to know, mages get hellish penalties for using any armor, more so if "heavy".

[v0]

yes movement speed weight stat reqs (str) and some armors need specialist skill too (or else you cant equip them). otherwise no negative side effects afaik. very different from typical d&d.

[Gyrmadet]

Originally posted by v0:

yes movement speed weight stat reqs (str) and some armors need specialist skill too (or else you cant equip them). otherwise no negative side effects afaik. very different from typical d&d.

thanks!

it seems that there are no heavy penalties even for the use of magic with melee weapons. I wonder what's the point of having staves?

[icardias]

Originally posted by Gyrmadet:

Originally posted by v0:

yes movement speed weight stat reqs (str) and some armors need specialist skill too (or else you cant equip them). otherwise no negative side effects afaik. very different from typical d&d.

thanks!

it seems that there are no heavy penalties even for the use of magic with melee weapons. I wonder what's the point of having staves?

the extra atributes and skills the staves have

[Gyrmadet]

I think those attributes/skills can be present in all weapons?

[Dragon]

If you give a mage high Strength in the Early to Mid game phases, then you are also gimping that same mage by not giving it high Intelligence, which is going to make your spells a lot weaker & ineffective. That is a big penalty.

Although towards the end of the game, you might have enough points to have both high Intelligence and high Strength, which makes this less of an issue.

Personally, I found staves in this game to be pretty gimpy. Dual wands always seemed to be better than a single stave. So I don't know why anyone would choose staves instead of dual wands.

[v0]

Originally posted by Dragon:

So I don't know why anyone would choose staves instead of dual wands.

yeah i wondered about same too while playing dos1.

[Gyrmadet]

Originally posted by Dragon:

If you give a mage high Strength in the Early to Mid game phases, then you are also gimping that same mage by not giving it high Intelligence, which is going to make your spells a lot weaker & ineffective. That is a big penalty.

Although towards the end of the game, you might have enough points to have both high Intelligence and high Strength, which makes this less of an issue.

Personally, I found staves in this game to be pretty gimpy. Dual wands always seemed to be better than a single stave. So I don't know why anyone would choose staves instead of dual wands.

if I understand correctly, on average a player should be able to finish the game with 49 points in total... that's a lot.
I tend to favor versatility over (excessively high) specialization

[SeaJunk]

"Melee Power Stance, despite its name, also applies its bonus damage to all skills, including spells, but also Staff of Magi. And since spells/Staff of Magi never miss, you should have Power Stance active all the time. Melee Power Stance requires you to equip a melee weapon, so Mages can activate it while wielding a Staff, but not wands. (It is for this reason I recommend Staff over Wands.)"
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1311458980

[Gyrmadet]

Originally posted by SeaJunk:

"Melee Power Stance, despite its name, also applies its bonus damage to all skills, including spells, but also Staff of Magi. And since spells/Staff of Magi never miss, you should have Power Stance active all the time. Melee Power Stance requires you to equip a melee weapon, so Mages can activate it while wielding a Staff, but not wands. (It is for this reason I recommend Staff over Wands.)"
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1311458980

in my build, I'm trying to favor survivability over "raw power", so the goal is to see if starting a battle with magic and, once depleted, going melee with full effectiveness is viable.