Re: Mages and CQC (close quarters combat)?
 

As others have noted, without specifics to discuss, this kind of thread tends to be "hypothetical" in least.

The things to keep in the back of your mind are:

1) while mages have a lot of spells that can do some pretty interesting things, the biggest issue that faces a mage versus non-mage warrior is that the non-mage warrior (outfitted with a bow for instance), has a better chance of his ranged weapon hitting the mage at 100 yards, than a mage has of hitting the warrior with their spells at 100 yards.

2) every special attack the mage has costs them fatigue points, a finite resource whereas every attack the warrior makes does not.

3) Every spell that the mage casts directly at his opponent, as a whole, tends to have an escape clause involved where the warrior gets a saving roll vs the mage's spell. Not all spells - but a fair number to be sure.

With over 800 spells in GURPS MAGIC, dicsussing close quarter's combat tends to be something of a minor problem. Are we talking about a purpose built warrior mage? Are we talking about a mage whose "build" is such that he is supposed to be capable of earning an income during down time, be worth the while during adventures, and only rarely be involved in combat? With some spells that take more than a second to cast, and our poor mage is definitely going to suffer some problems within a Close Quarters combat scenario right from the start.

Thus, with all that discussed above - there are so many variables involved - further discussion on this topic is going to be largely a function of generalities that will not really answer the question.

Now - all of the above discusses metagame issues, we're not even getting into the issue of actual tactics and such. For instance - how did the warrior get to within striking range? Was it the result of an ambush in which the mage is surprised? Was it the result of an assault on a position that the mage can't retreat from? Is it a mage with access to Magery 3 spells such as Link/Delay and could have set up a nasty surprise for the inbound warrior? If it wasn't a "hold at all costs" type of scenario, why didn't the mage simply withdraw?

As for builds of mages that take into account various things, I'd likely suggest going with a shield armed mage who wears leather armor as well as carries a spear. He won't stand out as an obvious Mage, will be no better nor worse than an ordinary man with minimal "militia" training with Spear and Shield, and if you get right down to it, being able to cast spells while carrying a shield is a GOOD thing.

Well, 'nuff said by myself on this.

Re: Mages and CQC (close quarters combat)?
 

Invulnerable might be overstating it, so let me put it another way. Points for mages using the standard magic system go a lot further than for other characters. A 1500 pt mage could spend 455 pts for IQ20 and Magery 5, a big investment, but every point after that gets them a new spell at skill 22 (or 21). For 1 pt they can have Utter Dome at skill 21 (or 10? points if you count the prereq chain.) In other words, mages can advance much faster than other characters.

Re: Mages and CQC (close quarters combat)?
 

Minor nitpick - 20 IQ/Magery 5 would only cost 255 points and give a base spell of 23/22. 455 would be IQ 30/Magery 5 and base 33/32 spells.

I ran a supers game back in 3e and made the mistake of allowing standard mages. Base spells of around 25 and very high Fatigue absolutely wrecked the game.

Re: Mages and CQC (close quarters combat)?
 

Very minor nitpick, wouldn't that be IQ 20 minus Will and Per ? I think the rules themselves caution against allowing more than 4 points of difference between IQ and its secondary stats.

Re: Mages and CQC (close quarters combat)?
 

No, you start with IQ 10 so IQ 20 would be 200 points.

Re: Mages and CQC (close quarters combat)?
 

I was reading it as a template :D

Re: Mages and CQC (close quarters combat)?
 

You're right, of course. Brain fart. And I'd had 255 originally but changed it at the last second in a panic that it was wrong.

So yeah, the first 1000pts could give our mage almost every spell in the book at 23 - allowing casting with no ritual, then use the remaining 500pts for force multiplier advantages like a Fast Regenerating ER Pool and several levels of Compartmentalised Mind (Magic Only).

Re: Mages and CQC (close quarters combat)?
 

I thought of that, but then his base spell would be in the 30s.

Re: Mages and CQC (close quarters combat)?
 

A skill in a spell of 20+ would make your mage a rapid fire weapon with endless ammo, because he has at least 2 FP free for lightning etc. Not to mention the also free defense spells, even without powerstone, and a mage with several hundert CP will have a big one, he can cast forever. Also he can have several spells ready for every situation prepared with meta spells. He may even don´t need to cast himself just a teleport spell triggered by a emeny attack, with a major healing just to be sure. Then he can prepare for battle and slaughter that fool.

Re: Mages and CQC (close quarters combat)?
 

Not to sidetrack this thread, but I have to wonder...

Would anyone even WANT to play a 1500 point character?

If a more normal human being is around 50 to 75 points, and 150 is better than usual, would you really want to be an IQ 20 "Mythic" endowed character?

Would you want to spend time around someone who is so much smarter than you, and knows so much more that even something like Psychology is something they're expert at without really having any of the training that a psychologist undergoes. Think about it - 20-6 = 14. 14 is deemed (per 3e) well trained or Expert (per 4e). Skills at 20+ is deemed Mastery.

so, if anyone wants to answer THIS particular question, you're invited to start a thread "Why I want to play a 1,500 point character". Otherwise, it seems like even discussing a 1,500 point character touches into a realm that few GM's would permit, let alone want in their campaigns.