Gemmed Treatment and Roleplay v.68468176981435

[Twilight]

Overexaggeration isn't really a great way to foster correct perceptions by those reading these boards who might be new.

I simply wanted to say that the classes are not balanced.  My understanding is that is intended.  The problem with trying to figure out if this or that is balanced, or how it is balanced, is that it really isn't in our perview.  We can make suggestions, provide evidence (I once contributed to getting a spell yanked from PC spelltrees), and in general talk ourselves silly, based on our perceptions of balance, but at the end of the day it is the sole responsibility of those running the game.  Their perceptions can be drastically different than we think them to be.

Our responsibility is having fun.

And chopping up motherfuckas  gemmers with bone swords.

[spawnloser]

number13, I think you're ignoring the fact that someone being scared of a magicker isn't a good thing.  If I was playing a magicker and wanted a friend, but everyone was as scared of me as someone in the Dark Ages was scared of a leper, do you think my magicker would be happy?  Do you think it would be a good thing?  What if people were too scared to do business with me because they think that being too close to me will curse them?  How is being universally feared a good thing?  Sure, fewer people will try to pick a bar fight, but even some of the prostitutes won't take my magicker's money.  Good thing still?

Still, all just a strawman, as pointed out.  This has nothing to do with the roleplay of the players of gemmers, but the roleplay of those playing the mundanes around those gemmers.  Gemmers are people.  Mundanes are people that fear magickers.  Gemmers are magickers.  Do the freaking math.  You don't have to polish their knob and tip them when you're scared of them.  Come on, man.

[FantasyWriter]

You want to see try hatred of your gemmer PCs... try playing a non human. 
It helps, trust me.

[number13]

Gemmers are people.  Mundanes are people that fear magickers.  Gemmers are magickers.  Do the freaking math.  You don't have to polish their knob and tip them when you're scared of them.  Come on, man.

Funny how the karma-ed class ends up being the one without restrictions on it's roleplay.  Magickers are free to be people. Mundanes are free to be people -- who fear magickers.

Yeah, this isn't going anywhere. Same time, same place next year?

[spawnloser]

Really?  That's bull-shit.  Gemmers (and all magickers, for that matter) have restrictions on their roleplay as well, as they are expected to also play realistic characters as well.  There are a myriad of possibilities, and not all of them have to be bad guys.  Not to mention that magickers probably shouldn't be any less scared around other magickers as mundanes should be, to be honest.

[Chettaman]

Let's all take another breath...

To be honest. No one should be afraid of magickers. Because they have just as many weaknesses if not more then anyone else. (unless they're smart) - Like I said before, the reason commoners fear magickers is ignorance.

Number13. I think you might just have a problem with Spawnloser. Calm down, please. You're trying to take everything Spawn says and turn it around somehow. Try having a discussion instead.

[Twilight]

Hah, I remember being a gemmer one time long ago, and this person played out his fear and hatred of this other gemmer quite well.  When he finally looked at me and realized I was also a gemmer, he said something like "Oh, well guess you aren't afraid of him."  My response was something around, "Oh no, I'm far more afraid of him than you are.  You only can guess at what he can do.  I know."

[jhunter]

Hah, I remember being a gemmer one time long ago, and this person played out his fear and hatred of this other gemmer quite well.  When he finally looked at me and realized I was also a gemmer, he said something like "Oh, well guess you aren't afraid of him."  My response was something around, "Oh no, I'm far more afraid of him than you are.  You only can guess at what he can do.  I know."

Ahahah. That's awesome.

[spawnloser]

"Oh no, I'm far more afraid of him than you are.  You only can guess at what he can do.  I know."

Perfect.  

[X-D]

Somebody should search out the quote from a few years back that was like that but from a player perspective.

Went something like, New players don't know enough to fear mages, middle players know enough to get killed by them and old players know why they are to be feared....or something like that.

My mages fear little cept other mages. And for good reason.

As to Number13 wanting mages nerfed or mundanes buffed (means the same thing.

Way way back in the day, call it from the start of arm. Mages were VERY buff, 4 types (before sorcs) each type had a far deeper spell tree then they do now and more skills. They could wield and cast and do many other scary things. Overthe course of the 90s, mages were constantly nerfed. First the ability to wield and cast, then the really powerful high level spells went, Then they added 3 new mage types, (This was the biggest nerf) When they added the new mages, all the old mages lost about 1/3 of the spell trees they had and those spells got spread over the rest of the mages along with a few...very few, new spells.

By year 2000, Mages were so nerfed that NOBODY was afraid of them, It was nearly impossible to get a mage to a point of real power because EVERY Mundane class including merchant was FAR more powerful out of the box then ANY mage class was at 20 days played.

And every player knew it. So, we had to put up with about 4 years of people complaining that mages were not scary, they had no power, etc etc etc.

Finally Halaster takes on the challenge. He fixed a bunch of broken spells and put them back in the game, He added new spells, He improved old spells, He made it a little easier for a mage to advance in the beginning.

Finally, when he was done, Mages had teeth, they were not (IMO) over powered, but capable of being scary.
I thought it was perfect to be honest. Since then mages have been getting steadily nerfed...again...people are complaining they are too powerful...again.

Heh....I hope arm1 ends before the cycle repeats to be honest.

[Qzzrbl]

number13, I think you're ignoring the fact that someone being scared of a magicker isn't a good thing.  If I was playing a magicker and wanted a friend, but everyone was as scared of me as someone in the Dark Ages was scared of a leper, do you think my magicker would be happy?  Do you think it would be a good thing?  What if people were too scared to do business with me because they think that being too close to me will curse them?  How is being universally feared a good thing?  Sure, fewer people will try to pick a bar fight, but even some of the prostitutes won't take my magicker's money.  Good thing still?

That's almost like saying, "What if I was playing a mul, and I wanted a friend, but everyone was secretly trying to gain my trust and send my ass back to Borsail for a hefty price..... Do you think my mul would be happy?"

Honestly, both the Staff and the docs have remained firm, Magickers are supposed to be universally hated and feared by just about everyone.

And there are several solutions to this.

• Don't make a magicker.
• Make a tribal magicker whose tribe generally accepts certain magickers.
• Make an uber in-the-closet magicker.

I'm sure there are plenty more.....

It's not about keeping anybody happy, it's simple. If you don't like being hated/feared, than a magicker is not the role for you.

I'll use myself as an example here:

"I don't like having my characters labeled "thief" upon entering a room, therefor I don't play elves."

"I don't like being forced to pursue a single goal throughout my character's life, therefor I don't play dwarves."

"I don't like being isolated from the near-entirety of the playerbase, therefor I've never apped to play a halfling."

"I don't like having to play a slow-witted character, so I don't play half-giants."

"I don't like risking getting gutted by a random PC or NPC in the next hour, so I don't start characters in 'Rinth."

See where this is going?

"I don't like being hated and persecuted by most everybody therefor I don't play magickers."

It really shouldn't need to be spelled out any further to the playerbase than that.

[spawnloser]

Qzzzzzzzzzzrbl, you're making the mistake that hyzenhock and number13 are making (most specific instance the , "noone likes getting pwned, so that's why people hate magickers instead of fear them" statement from a while back).  When I say, "is a magicker going to be happy?" I am NOT talking about the player.  I can be relatively certain that not one person playing this game is a magicker.  I am talking about the character.  When I am playing a magicker, I expect people to be scared of my character and treat my character like a pariah no matter what my character does.  I can be happy playing a pariah.  My character won't be happy being a pariah.  There is a difference.

[Qzzrbl]

Qzzzzzzzzzzrbl, you're making the mistake that hyzenhock and number13 are making (most specific instance the , "noone likes getting pwned, so that's why people hate magickers instead of fear them" statement from a while back).  When I say, "is a magicker going to be happy?" I am NOT talking about the player.  I can be relatively certain that not one person playing this game is a magicker.  I am talking about the character.  When I am playing a magicker, I expect people to be scared of my character and treat my character like a pariah no matter what my character does.  I can be happy playing a pariah.  My character won't be happy being a pariah.  There is a difference.

The "It's not about keeping anybody happy" encompassed characters too.... I think. >_>

::Edited to add::

Magicker (characters) aren't supposed to be happy anyhow.... They're abominations.

Just as elves aren't supposed to be openly and genuinely trustworthy to everyone they meet.

Comes with the territory. o:

[Chettaman]

Let's not forget they can be.

[a strange shadow]

All this talk could go around in circles for days, but what it boils down to is one question: "Is it fun?"

My definition of fun is something that promotes conflict AND interaction.

Spanking the playerbase for wanting to interact with each other is only going to cause unhappiness. Find ways to promote grey areas of conflict without segregating everyone into tiny cliques of bored, frustrated harshness.

*plink plink*

[spawnloser]

Doesn't matter, Q, because they're still going to seek happiness.

[Qzzrbl]

Doesn't matter, Q, because they're still going to seek happiness.

Well, let's just hope they don't seek it exclusively from the mundane masses that hate/fear them.... Kind of a lost cause.

"But Qzzrbl! That's not how it goes! Why, I had several magickers find happiness with mundane characters."

Whatever, staff and dox sez, and have been saying since I joined this community a few years back:

Magick is hated and feared, period, regardless of who they are, or who they work for.  Anyone who is friends with or sleeps with or nice to or defends a magicker should fully expect to be just as hated and feared for it, regardless of who they are or, or who they work for.  This is the norm of society.

So that's the doctrine I'll continue following.

[Pale Horse]

As was mentioned, the discussion is just going around in circles now.  It's completed it's purpose.

Ghost!  Lock the thread.

[spawnloser]

Well, let's just hope they don't seek it exclusively from the mundane masses that hate/fear them.... Kind of a lost cause.

Actually, they could try, but the player of the magicker should know that it should be difficult.

[Malken]

As was mentioned, the discussion is just going around in circles now.  It's completed it's purpose.

Ghost!  Lock the thread.

What was accomplished? A staff asked us what would make magickers more feared and hatred and some of the ideas are now deeply buried within the bitchfest.

[Chettaman]

Ya know... I think gickers... just for the hell of it, should...

>emote glares at ~mundane
>emote utters an incantation
that might do it.
It would be too much, I think to emote things happening afterward since... a guard or something would mess you up. Or... would it? ("it" being the emote)

[A Dry, Quiet War]

Ya know... I think gickers... just for the hell of it, should...

>emote glares at ~mundane
>emote utters an incantation

If you emote coded messages, especially anything related to magick, nessalin will sacrifice a kitten ON YOUR GRAVE.

It's almost never correct to feign something that is coded without actually doing the coded thing.

[Semper]

How to Handle Magickers 101:

Why are magickers hated?

Magickers are hated and feared by the populace. This is a fact of life on Zalanthas. In New Tuluk, a city once decimated by elementals, magick is forbidden. The general populace does not know what a magicker is and isn't capable of, and assumes the worst. Magickers are blamed for disease, bad luck, and any other negative occurence.

That's from the documentation. Just as elves can't ride because of the documentation, magickers are suppose to be hated and feared. What are some reasons why a player might struggle with this part of the documentation but not others (e.g. elves can't ride)?

1) It's a lot more difficult to enforce properly. If an elf is caught riding a mount, the stance against it is unmistakable. Not only will you likely face the dire consequences for it IG, but OOC, you'll probably have a word from staff. The same goes for Noble/Commoner sexual relationships in Tuluk. This -never- happens because it's enforced to the T. Not only will an offending Noble and Commoner be harassed and ridiculed IG, you'll probably see a similar situation from the staff and the Noble will probably be stored. But for magicker/commoner relationships (even non-sexual)? There's never been a real cut-off barring players from taking that route (as far as I can recall). It happens IG because there is room for it to happen in the documentations.

Let's say the "no elves riding" part of the documentation was relaxed a bit more. I'm sure we'd see more elves who (for some exceptional reason or another) decided they -had- to ride. You would have to put up with the ridicule, sure, but that only makes it more enjoyable to play for some players. What about the "no Noble/Commoner sexual relationships" rule being relaxed a bit? We'll for certain see Tuluki Nobles/Commoners going for that "secret" relationship on occasion. Why? Because it heightens the enjoyment of the game for the players involved. It's the same reason why you might steal cookies from the cookie jar.

2) The code does not dissuade you from taking that course. I've brought this up before, but spice has both its benefits and harms. Although I think it would do the game better to see more spice-addicts, honestly, the code makes it less appealing to players to play a spice-addict because the disadvantages (from cost and the harmful effects of being addicted) outweigh the advantages (being able to play an addict and the small (almost minuscule) coded benefits.

Certain mundane classes can become almost unstoppable with the right spells on them. To a player (and even characters) most like 'winning', and if you're able to get that with only having to face a bit of trouble from other characters who you can likely kill/threaten/scare away because of your new-found 'powers' and special allies, I think it's quite a tempting offer for most.

Not even on the coded level, if you're talking strictly relation-ship wise, we've all probably enjoyed watching or reading stories about the 'forbidden love'. It's a concept we probably could find some enjoyment playing and the documentation leaves room open for such relationships to happen. And if others have a problem with it? You can have your character join Oash and be protected, or have your magicker lover scare them off, or any number of other possibilities to your advantage.

3) Players don't like having options limited. This is more a OOC reason why nothing much has been done about this problem for so long. When there's a push to actually hate and fear magickers IG, magicker players don't like it because their interaction becomes limited. Those playing the haters don't like it because those players playing magickers complain about it. So it goes in circles like we can see just by reading a few posts back on this thread... I don't know if this really happened or not, but when the staff stance against Tuluki Noble/Commoner sexual relations went in, players complained about it. We didn't see much else come about because it only affected only a handful of players and also due to the clear staff position on it, but with magicker/mundane topics, it affects a large portion of the players. Until staff starts taking a rigid stance on it (unfortunately) this cycle will probably continue.

Conclusion:
I'm looking at this whole issue from a more player's perspective than the character's. We play our characters from what we know as players. A player who is clueless about combat in Armageddon, for example, can't play a character who is an expert on combat. We go through this whole debate now and then because we as players can't really come to a consensus on where to draw the line on certain things, how far to take certain situations, etc. With more clearer boundaries between magickers and mundanes (which the players can agree to, or at the very least know), backed up by both the code and by staff, I think we'll have a chance at better reflecting the documents in the game.

Now, there's still other aspects to this whole debate that I've left out. The three reasons that I've mentioned here only reflect what I perceive as to why players have a trouble hating/fearing magickers like the documentation says.

[Semper]

What would make players roleplay being more afraid of magickers?

From the...5th page on this thread... I've given up looking for line of reasoning for much of this thread... let's try and keep this on topic?

[edited to add]

I think another thing we could address (or has been addressed, I just can't find where it was addressed) is how to make it enjoyable for players playing gemmed PCs, considering that the documentation is followed correctly by everyone? We may need a new thread for that though.

[Cutthroat]

What would make players roleplay being more afraid of magickers?

I think you'd be looking at coded additions to mix things up and make interactions both fresh and unpredictable. When propriety is expected only through roleplay, there are always work-arounds, like "but this mundane is soooo sexy!" or "but this gemmer saved my life!" or what have you. The documentation should be supported heavily through code, basically.

A special curse spell that every elementalist starts with, though its effects would vary by element. Its purpose would be to give magickers the ability to add negative effects and echoes to other PCs. It wouldn't be castable at nil, it would not invoke the crim-code on anyone and it wouldn't show any echo to anyone when cast. It would just be placeable on anyone the elementalist interacts with. Of course the elementalist could just go on and never cast that thing, and someone mentioned placing curses on people the elementalist emotes with at random - I think that is an interesting idea too, although if you ever emote in the negative (e.g., "emote ignores ~amos") the curse might attach anyway. I don't think that is a big problem though. If these stories of curses are meant to be "all in the head" and not real curses, then the echoes can be designed in that way, e.g. "You feel like you can't hear as well as you could before." "It seems your armpits are sweatier than usual." and so on. Make interacting with magickal items, objects, and fluids have the same risk of being around an elementalist as described. It would be easy to ignore the messages and effects, sure, but we're all big roleplayers and we can handle it.

Beneficial spells should have a negative after-effect if they are cast on someone not of the same element. For mundanes, this would be every element. Say a Vivaduan heals a Rukkian, or a mundane. After a few IG hours the game could echo something negative, or codedly do something negative. A low healing skill might end up echoing, "Your old wounds begin to open again." and you lose, say, 10 HP. A higher healing skill might echo "You feel as if your old wounds are going to burst." but nothing happens other than that. The latter would be more like coming down from spice; the former is almost harmless but enough to give the person a slap on the wrist and a reminder they used an abomination to stay alive.

Edit to add: On second thought I don't really like things clashing with other elements, or curses at random, because eventually it will get "old" and "predictable" and could also serve to pull mundanes and magickers apart even further when those clashes between them should still be visible. I do like the idea of magickal items still having an effect though. I would like to see opinions on coded effects on magickers and mundanes though.

I can see why these ideas might suck and I see their potential flaws, but I'll steadfastly hold the position that coded changes are the way to do things.