Mage trait: Astute

[ILikeProgramming]

You forgot to factor in the 70% CTH. Whether or not that makes a difference, I'm not sure. I'm not feeling well enough to do math.

It shouldn't because the 70% is multiplies by both.

[Lord_Aether]

I thought we were talking MAX damage, in which every attack hits. In which CTH doesn't matter.

[Assasin]

I vote to make it similar to dextrous. It sounds a lot less complicated and serves the same purpose, especially if the mage already had the magical ability.

[Noyga]

Then it would be redundant with dextrous, and will overpower dextrous, astute mages like some elven sorceresses

[Jetrel]

Then it would be redundant with dextrous, and will overpower dextrous, astute mages like some elven sorceresses

It would be intended to never appear on units that have dextrous - either elven sorceresses would not get it, or would get it and not dextrous.

Note that this applies to both suggested forms.

[Darth Fool]

How about astute adding an extra +10% chance to hit on range attacks, cumulative with magic attacks. Thus, an astute mage would have an 80% chance to hit. An astute elvish shaman would still benefit. Actually they could benefit more if they are attacking someone on good defensive terrain, Unless you make it so that the 10% is not an addative but a multiplicative factor[, ie 70%->77%, 20%->22%. An astute orcish grunt (ok, this would only be possible if a scenario designer set it up this way) would have no benefit as he has no ranged attack.

The proposed modification of the # and power of attacks seems more like it should be named "rapid" or some such ("quick" already being taken) and would work equally well for melee. Imagine a rapid troll 7-2 -> 5-3 or a rapid thunderer 18-1 -> 9-2.

[TheLost1]

I like rapid, more than astute...


OOOOOHHH, OOOOOOOOHHH, LOOK, A BANDWAGON, WAIT FOR ME!!!!!

[Jetrel]

How about astute adding an extra +10% chance to hit on range attacks, cumulative with magic attacks. Thus, an astute mage would have an 80% chance to hit. An astute elvish shaman would still benefit. Actually they could benefit more if they are attacking someone on good defensive terrain, Unless you make it so that the 10% is not an addative but a multiplicative factor[, ie 70%->77%, 20%->22%. An astute orcish grunt (ok, this would only be possible if a scenario designer set it up this way) would have no benefit as he has no ranged attack.

Yeah, that could work.

The proposed modification of the # and power of attacks seems more like it should be named "rapid" or some such ("quick" already being taken) and would work equally well for melee. Imagine a rapid troll 7-2 -> 5-3 or a rapid thunderer 18-1 -> 9-2.

Other words:

Lithe, Nimble, Deft, Spry

I'm game for "Deft", since it would work as well for physical and mental things.

[TheLost1]

nimble sounds better IMHO

[Flametrooper]

How about Agile?

[TheLost1]

In retrospect, deft is probably the best, because the others could be confsed with quick.

[Darth Fool]

I like spry. It gives the proper impression that the unit is attacking more vigourously, but to less effect.

[YbeRn00b]

I like "ranged -1 damage & +1 attacks". Seems powerful enough since they depend so much on their ranged attacks.

But I don't remove "strong" from mages. In my eyes all mages are very unique individuals and should have many traits to choose from to reflect this.

[Darth Fool]

But I don't remove "strong" from mages. In my eyes all mages are very unique individuals and should have many traits to choose from to reflect this.

Besides which, there is always louie from Rune Soldier: rune-soldierhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rune_Soldier

*hides in shame*