Change implemented for sorcerers

[Reiloth]

Code Select Expand

You must have two hands free to cast that spell.

Really? We both know that's also not true given X Y Z spells cast at X Y Z powers.

Ayup, but not all hybrid burgsorcs are gonna have access to <mystery>, given the assumptions I've made on what spells are included in each of the four paths.

Also, I guess I'll ask again, are there plans to change the name of the guild from sorcerer to something more applicable? The traditional sorcerer connotation doesn't really make sense anymore.

True, and I don't know if that's a bad thing.

[Reiloth]

Well, they still don't gain mana the way elementalists do.

"Sorcerers do not 'automatically' gain energy to cast their spells as elementalists can. They must instead gather it from sources of life."

From the help file.

That makes them sorcerers.

[Marauder Moe]

I'm not going to debate magick with you, here or privately.

Manonfire, you're treading the same territory as well.

I'm just offering advice, as a party who doesn't have much invested in this argument.  Bemoan the loss of full sorcerers all you want, but when you start talking about or even hinting about specific spells, you're crossing a line in my mind.

[Reiloth]

If we can't be adults and discuss the brass tacks of the guild...Then I guess we should call the argument 'warrior vs sorcerer, depends who's playing bro' a discussion that can't take place on the GDB.

my position is unassailable.

[Marauder Moe]

Indeed.  That is a discussion that can't take place on the GDB.

[Malken]

All this mechanic/secrecy/hush hush BS that makes many conversations nearly impossible to debate is why that other forum exists.

[Reiloth]

All this mechanic/secrecy/hush hush BS that makes many conversations nearly impossible to debate is why that other forum exists.

In a word, yes.

I don't condone that forum at all, but it is why people use it, in essence. And I would be caught dead using it, and actually like the phrase 'Find out IC', but when discussing sweeping meta-change to a class, why we can't separate our IC/OOC knowledge to figure out the finer points of what is going on is beyond me.

Maybe people with Karma should have their own forum, where they can hash this stuff out. Elitism!

[Cale_Knight]

"Sorcerers do not 'automatically' gain energy to cast their spells as elementalists can. They must instead gather it from sources of life."

From the help file.

That makes them sorcerers.

Correct.

[Ouroboros]

<redacted out of respect to Delirium's moderation>

Can I show you a whiran instead? We're low on sorcerers right now.

I'm sure you got my point. Let's stay off mechanics though, this thread is a bit too important to many players to see it locked over such.

My point to begin with was that any class, even a mundane one, can be a nightmare to deal with in the right hands. The bones of mages and sorcerers across the Known are a testament to that. I'm sure many players of such can attest to the power of a well-timed arrow from a ranger or a warrior's blow if caught off-guard. Mage killers aren't a new concept. Does a sorcerer's potential power reach higher than a mundane? Of course. But few achieve that, just as few really achieve the full potential of any class. Which is why the full potential of any class is perhaps a poor way to judge if a class is realistically overpowered and needs to be removed, when the percentage of the population that achieves it to begin with is in the single digits.

[manonfire]

"Sorcerers do not 'automatically' gain energy to cast their spells as elementalists can. They must instead gather it from sources of life."

From the help file.

That makes them sorcerers.

Correct.

Oh. I see. I was trying to reconcile Armageddon classes with the source material (Dark Sun). My mistake.

[Reiloth]

Yeah, I mean Armageddon's moved away from a lot of stuff that was canon to Dark Sun. Some of it remains, but a lot of it doesn't. That's what makes it a beautiful game!

[Rahnevyn]

If you'd like to make a separate thread discussing the merits of mechanics discussions, feel free, but I believe the current policy on not discussing things such as which class gets what spell and what individual spells do or can be used for is well understood, especially by all of you who were getting into that.  The moderators are doing their job; please respect that. If you have a question about moderation you can submit a request to staff for review; don't get snarky or argue. Let's get this thread back on track.

[Ouroboros]

Tone down the rhetoric, and lighten up about getting disagreed with...it's going to happen.

Would you prefer a light-hearted humorous approach instead? The message would remain the same really, just as yours does, even when buried in smilies.

With us changing the game here and there, even though you have raised all hell when we do something with which you disagree.

Lighten up, Nyr. If you think calmly sharing thoughts at any length is raising hell, I'm not sure you know the meaning of the phrase. I'm fine with being disagreed with, honest. I hope you are as well, as it's definitely going to happen. I also hope you'll continue to welcome criticism from anyone who cares enough about the game to offer it.

I do speak up when I disagree with something as far as the health of the game is concerned though, yes. And you'll consistently I'm sure continue to make light of it in response, by claiming fire and brimstone on my end. I don't mind, it's all good. We're both passionate about the game and that's the only reason I respect your opinion even when I disagree with it. As long as you pause to consider my message, you're welcome to dismiss it after in any fashion you like.

These decisions you make do have repercussions though, and you know this. It's what the process of proposal and approval is for, and why I imagine long discussions take place before any such change is implemented. You can't turn around and tell me these changes are entirely harmless and without repercussion, or you wouldn't need to discuss and consider them amongst yourselves to begin with. The fact you've discussed them and came to the conclusion the long-term effects are positive doesn't change the fact there are long-term effects to begin with. Nor the fact you might be wrong, given you're still (to my knowledge) human.

So instead of making light of another opinion on a subject matter you already know was serious enough to warrant long discussion and consideration on staff's end... you could simply acknowledge that opinion, consider it's value, and whatever your decision, politely thank someone for caring enough to offer you a different view than your own.

[Reiloth]

I think the way you both write things irks each other.

And, there's merit in both sides of the 'argument' if you want to call it that.

I agree that opinions are like assholes and elbows. We all have them, and should be able to express them on the GDB. If a player doesn't agree with what Staff offers, then they can voice their malcontent. If a Staff member doesn't like what a player has to say (and they aren't trolling or being a dink), then they should just agree to disagree.

[manonfire]

I dunno, Reiloth, anytime I've seen a discussion here where players consistently express their malcontent, it ends up running into the old "this is how things are, sorry you don't like it, you can always go play another game" wall.

These threads aren't really for discussion of changes imo (ideally, staff would discuss those changes with the players beforehand and ask for input, but that ain't the world we live in) it's more about people expressing their opinions (good or bad) for as long as it takes for initial reactions to fade away and the thread to be abandoned.

Personally, I'm pretty ambivalent about the changes. I imagine the hybrid classes will be interesting to play - what bothers me the most is there wasn't any sort of event IG that led to these changes (as far as I know). The PCs running those sorcerers were left holding a bag of shit with no real logical way to move forward with their characters.

It's unfortunate that the opportunity wasn't seized to do something truly cool with the change, and in my mind, that's fairly indicative of how the game has evolved in the last ten years.

[Gimfalisette]

I dunno, Reiloth, anytime I've seen a discussion here where players consistently express their malcontent, it ends up running into the old "this is how things are, sorry you don't like it, you can always go play another game" wall.

Except not all players are expressing malcontent? Some of us are quite satisfied with the change and interested to see how the game works with this in place. Any time there's a change like this, the critical voices automatically seem louder because that's mostly who keeps posting.

I couldn't ever see myself playing a sorcerer before, but I can now from a concept perspective.

[BadSkeelz]

What if there are no active sorcerers left alive in the game? Good time to implement changes I say.

Man I'm glad these are 8 karma subguilds. The thought of 4 karma demi-sorcerers was truly worrisome.

[Reiloth]

Yeah, don't get me wrong, I love this change.

I was more trying to explain why it's dumb to say a 100 day Warrior is even playing the same game as a 100 day Sorcerer. I guess there 'aren't that many 100 day sorcerers', is the end of that argument.

[manonfire]

I dunno, Reiloth, anytime I've seen a discussion here where players consistently express their malcontent, it ends up running into the old "this is how things are, sorry you don't like it, you can always go play another game" wall.

Except not all players are expressing malcontent? Some of us are quite satisfied with the change and interested to see how the game works with this in place. Any time there's a change like this, the critical voices automatically seem louder because that's mostly who keeps posting.

I couldn't ever see myself playing a sorcerer before, but I can now from a concept perspective.

Read that line as a response to Reiloth's post above mine, cause that's what it was.

[Ouroboros]

I dunno, Reiloth, anytime I've seen a discussion here where players consistently express their malcontent, it ends up running into the old "this is how things are, sorry you don't like it, you can always go play another game" wall.

I think such discussions would go a lot smoother if everyone, on both sides, remembers that staff members come from the ranks of players. A player's opinion is just as valid as a staff member's opinion, because they're two sides of the same coin. Every single staff member was once a player, who more than likely expressed their opinion on the GDB and was at one point or another shot down by a staff member. Their personality and way of thinking didn't change just because they were brought into staff, and whatever good or bad opinions they had as players came with them.

I'm sure Nyr was just as much an.... er, was just as much himself when he was a player, as he is a staff member. My arguments with him in particular aren't of the staff vs player mentality, because I don't subscribe to that notion. I'd be off on another forum if I did. They're just different views expressed between two admittedly stubborn and passionate members of this community. But his opinion is by default no better on a subject matter than my own or anyone else's opinion, just because he's in a position to enforce his. However well-informed by facts, both are still opinions and conclusions based on said facts and just as likely to be faulty as true.

...I guess there 'aren't that many 100 day sorcerers', is the end of that argument.

The end of that argument actually is, "There aren't that many 100-day anything, sorcerers or otherwise." The few that reach that level are a force to be reckoned with. How big a force differs, yes, but due to more factors than just a guild/sub combination.

[Gimfalisette]

Read that line as a response to Reiloth's post above mine, cause that's what it was.

Yeah, I got that, but you used the word "consistently," which implies that there is some sort of...consistency of player opinion. Which there isn't.

I'm just not sure what else staff is supposed to do when there's a difference of opinion, other than say, "Sorry this doesn't work for some of you." Someone has to be driving the argosy.

[Armaddict]

Quote from: Reiloth on Today at 05:01:58 AM
...I guess there 'aren't that many 100 day sorcerers', is the end of that argument.

The end of that argument actually is, "There aren't that many 100-day anything, sorcerers or otherwise." The few that reach that level are a force to be reckoned with. How big a force differs, yes, but due to more factors than just a guild/sub combination.

And if a player gets so strong that staff needs to excise that player from the game world, then that's just messed up and wrong because staff furthering along PC-involved plots is -bad-.  BAD.

[BadSkeelz]

The end of that argument actually is, "There aren't that many 100-day anything, sorcerers or otherwise." The few that reach that level are a force to be reckoned with. How big a force differs, yes, but due to more factors than just a guild/sub combination.

Please tell me how a warrior, ranger, or assassin is supposed to achieve the ability to kill an entire City State NPC (and PC) population singlehandidly in a few minutes so I can try it out.

[manonfire]

Read that line as a response to Reiloth's post above mine, cause that's what it was.

Yeah, I got that, but you used the word "consistently," which implies that there is some sort of...consistency of player opinion. Which there isn't.

Except it doesn't. Players consistently posting their opinions and consistency of player opinions are two different things.

[Armaddict]

The end of that argument actually is, "There aren't that many 100-day anything, sorcerers or otherwise." The few that reach that level are a force to be reckoned with. How big a force differs, yes, but due to more factors than just a guild/sub combination.

Please tell me how a warrior, ranger, or assassin is supposed to achieve the ability to kill an entire City State NPC (and PC) population singlehandidly in a few minutes so I can try it out.

Show me the 100 day sorcerer that makes a -demand- that staff is supposed to kill an entire City State population for them out of nowhere, and I'll show you a) Someone who is about to die, and b) Someone who should not play a sorcerer.
 That kind of effect is more reminiscent of a Templar's Glass Ceiling than a Sorcerer's...A templar, it makes more sense, because their power is political and hierarchy based.  They rarely use sheer coded power in the portrayal of their role.  They need staff to show that the city does indeed operate this way, via use of senior NPC's and templars acting with their immortal backing.
 Sorcerer's power comes directly through code, as far as playability factor.  It's only when they start getting to where they want to change everything, just for them, instead of just run a plot involving other people, that such effects are needed.  I.e. A simple answer from staff saying 'We aren't willing to do that' is a more viable solution then 'No player should be able to reach that strength'.  One type of glass ceiling -does- require constant maintenance.  The other puts the burden of utility in the game world on the player.