Why are Sages fair? Opinions wanted!

[Graeme Dice]

Huzurdaddi said:
You can somewhat insulate yourself from the horror of not finding mages by taking magic-3 scale and playing one of the nations who has decent base researchers ( woe to he who plays Abysia, Nieflehem, or Ulm and does not find Sages).

I wouldn't include Ulm there. Sages in drain 3 are only slightly more effective researchers than master smith's.

[Taqwus]

Aye. On the other hand, it might be helpful for the random magic, if we're talking base earth/fire Ulm. Death and Astral in particular are decent for bootstrapping since the divination spells only require one level and the first boosting items take two.

[Chazar]

Very nice discussion! I now think that sages are a huge advantage, but not in a life-and-death sense (I guess I just exaggerated a bit ).

I also realize that their gold/research ratio is indeed ok, but it is really their quick availability which bugs me. (Because I am convinced now that Lore Masters are ok.) Having them earlier will allow a nation to jump ahead way too quickly...especially in small-map games...since they can be built so quick!

However, changing them to a total 3 RP and 30 gold cost as I proposed earlier might be a bad idea either: the magic scale would then have a much larger impact on sages (drain3 rendering them usesless while magic 3 doubles their effectivity). I cannot decide whether this is good or a bad...??? (Opinions?)
(I do not know if it is possible to make them drain immune, but I guess this would be too much of a boost either...)
(Maybe 4RP/50GP could be a compromise, but might be too similar to Philosophers.)

---

Another option which came to my mind could be leaving their research bonus and cold cost alone, but adding a resource cost of, say, 40 points. It might not be too thematic (you really need a lot of wood in order to produce all those thick books such a nasty sage uses up, you know... ), but it might serve its purpose: Without a proper fortress, one could only produce a sage every other turn. Building a fortress would then snatch away resources from somewhere else, so it is a decision that one has to think about it (unlike now, where capturing a library means building a lab immediately! Miasmas excluded...).

Does this make any sense to anybody else? Why would you consider to take part or not in a game with one of the above depicted mods in place?

[Oversway]

I say this ought to be the only proper way to respond to taking a strong nation with poor researching mages. Why should sages save a player from making that tough choice like the game is typically played these days?

Why do you want to limit the options in the game? If someone wants to take a chance, that should be an ok option. Just like other players won't take that chance. Everyone gets to play their own way...

[Endoperez]

Oversway said:

Why do you want to limit the options in the game? If someone wants to take a chance, that should be an ok option. Just like other players won't take that chance. Everyone gets to play their own way...

Taking that chance pays off way too often. T'ien Ch'i has great researchers, but while using them is an option they are not needed because sages are available and easier to build (only lab, no frot/temple).

I think nerfing sages would take away one option (drain/zero-magic relying on Sages to research) and make lots of others resonable choices.

[Saber Cherry]

Once you include an Owl Quill (+3) and the +1 exp bonus you get after 10 turns or 2 battles, sages are not so advantageous.

Sage, 1 star, owl quill: 11 rp @ 90g
Generic 1-magic mage, 1 star, owl quill: 7 rp @ 60g

That comes to .55 rp/gold/turn versus .57 rp/gold/turn, which is trivial. I always give my researchers quills unless I have no access to air. Really, one of the big plusses of sages is that you get a random pick for only 90 gold, which is great for opening up new possibilities.

Edit: I can see sages going up to 100g or even 110g, just because they are such a nice combo of a research bonus and a cheap random pick. However, I think the game plays out fine without changing them at all. If I had a choice between a sage province versus a druid province versus and amazon province versus a bloodhenge druid province... it would probably be a toss-up.

[Endoperez]

Oops, double post...

[Endoperez]

Hey, Saber Cherry is back!

Only some nations have that cheap mages. The thing is, the cheap mages should be a bonus, not something almost as useful as sages in their specialty and often less useful because their paths are covered by stronger mages.

Maybe sages are too useful with true random and research bonus 4? Would they still be as useful with Astral 1, res. bonus 3? Would any other path suit them better, so that they cannot be used as a magic duel fodder against Tien Chi/Marignon, or communion slaves?

some editing...