Magickers and Nil Reach.

[BadSkeelz]

Tell that to all the Master Merchants who spam-crafted their way into their fortunes in the privacy and isolation of their apartment/clan hall/tavern/boss's warehouse.

Trust me, they're on the list.

Spell issues aside, I also think this kind of change would mean mundane characters' lives would have lots more magick in them.

This is a valid concern. However, if there are more magickers around who aren't unbeatable light shows, it gives mundanes a chance to kill 'em why they're young. It seems to be a choice between "more numerous but perhaps weaker magickers" vs "fewer but more plot-deforming powerful magickers." I'm not really sure which is the better choice.

If I'm trying to practice "laser death ray" without "nil", I will either need to explode myself then sleep it off, or I'll need to run around exploding random NPCs. At high levels, I may need to cast it a dozen times to even have a chance to fail once.

This made me think: why does every mage seem to believe they have a right to fully maxed spells? More specifically, do mage players really think they need to be maxed out to be effective character? If you have a spell called "death ray," does it really need to be that high to be effective?

It almost sounds like we're more in favor of making all mages gemmed.

Gemmed or Tribal shamans (who in my personal opinion are the best representation of Armageddon elemental magick).

The level of hate for magic type characters and the continued desire to make their already difficult lives more difficult baffles me.

I'm posting here from the point of critiquing what I see of failures in the magick code that reinforce annoying player practices and, ultimately, poison the place of magick in the game.

My hatred for magick as a theme or storytelling concept is a separate impulse from my gameplay-critiquing one.

[Lizzie]

The level of hate for magic type characters and the continued desire to make their already difficult lives more difficult baffles me.

It's pretty simple:
There are lots of players of mages, past-present.
There are a FEW of those players who are more interested in being bad-ass, glaring examples of "how to spam-cast to PK Mastery" than they are in playing a less "in your face" role using magick guilds as a tool rather than the focus.
There are a FEW players who don't play mages, who only see those few who do the "in your face" thing, and either don't see, or intentionally ignore, all the other mages played by people who are interested in magicks as a tool, and not a focus.
The few who gripe are louder on the GDB than the majority who don't gripe, AND they assume that the ones they've seen who aren't up to their personal standards represent the majority of mage-playing players.

Although on many other topics, these "gripers" would say "Let the roleplay do the job of weeding out the bad apples, and stop interfering with nerfing [insert griper's favorite guild/city/clan]." On the subject of magick, however, they'd prefer the code to dictate the roleplay. Because for whatever reason - they're not getting satisfaction from the results of their player complaints against those "bad apples" who are clearly doing something horrible and causing the game to break.

/sarcasm-generously-peppered-with-actual-opinion

[fourTwenty]

The level of hate for magic type characters and the continued desire to make their already difficult lives more difficult baffles me.

Sorry, but sitting alone all day and grinding out a nil to the point where I can obliverate damn near anything or anyone in the game is not at all difficult. But it should be. Becoming a master mage should be difficult, it should be a chore. They should be rare and feared. Mastering back stab is hard as hell, for good reason. Why should mastering Evans Tentacle of Spiked Intrusion not be a difficult chore?

[Erythil]

I don't know what game you guys are playing, but I've never seen there be more than maybe a half-dozen 'master mages' in game at any given time that are in any way worthy of the title.  Most of the players who do spam casting to max soon go out and get themselves killed in stupid ways when they find that their code prowess doesn't match their ability to effectively utilize those tools.

The magic grind might be easy, but using spells effectively isn't mainly about having those spells, especially now that a certain potent assassination spell has been removed from the game.  I'd argue that the grind for physical combat skills is probably a little too -hard-.

[Warsong]

I don't even understand the belief that it needs to be possible to max out the most powerful type of character in 100% safety and with greater ease than any mundane. If anyone was to suggest that backstab or poisoning or something like that should be able to be maxed for free in the safety of one's apartment or some remote cave, they'd be rightfully laughed out of the community. The idea is beyond absurd.

It's entirely contrary to everything this game is supposed to be about. Dangerous, rare, volatile characters that can generally destroy most opponents with laughable ease, or at least be nigh-invulnerable... that seems like it should be the hardest kind of character to max out. Not the friggin' easiest. It's pants-on-head ridiculous to me. Even without Nil, training fireball is no less a mechanical hurdle than training backstab.

The social difficulties seem like precisely the thing that playing a mage is supposed to be all about. Not mindlessly spamcasting in the bastion of infallible safety that is the temple, or some obscure cave where somebody might show up once a month. It seems self-explanatory that mages are supposed to be scary precisely because they have to go around doing dangerous magick, hurting people (or at least creatures) -- unless they choose not to use magick that hurts people. Hell, it'd even create a distinction between those who do and don't hurt people. And those who don't should not be masters at doing it. Those who want to be masters of the proverbial fireball, they should have to endure the risk and difficulty of actually fireballing things.

The only problem is that mages can't easily get rid of their own buffs, which seems a pretty straight-forward thing to fix. Certainly that shouldn't be the reason why removing Nil is inconceivable. I think it is at least beyond any kind of dispute that it's against the spirit of the game that mages can become powerful as easily as they can, and in the way that they currently do. Surely it's utterly antithesis to the setting and lore.

[Lizzie]

I don't even understand the belief that it needs to be possible to max out the most powerful type of character in 100% safety and with greater ease than any mundane. If anyone was to suggest that backstab or poisoning or something like that should be able to be maxed for free in the safety of one's apartment or some remote cave, they'd be rightfully laughed out of the community. The idea is beyond absurd.

It's entirely contrary to everything this game is supposed to be about. Dangerous, rare, volatile characters that can generally destroy most opponents with laughable ease, or at least be nigh-invulnerable... that seems like it should be the hardest kind of character to max out. Not the friggin' easiest. It's pants-on-head ridiculous to me. Even without Nil, training fireball is no less a mechanical hurdle than training backstab. The social difficulties seem like precisely the thing that playing a mage is supposed to be all about. Not mindlessly spamcasting in the bastion of infallible safety that is the temple, or some obscure cave where somebody might show up once a month.

The only problem is that mages can't easily get rid of their own buffs, which seems a pretty straight-forward thing to fix. Certainly that shouldn't be the reason why removing Nil is inconceivable. I think it is at least beyond any kind of dispute that it's against the spirit of the game that mages can become powerful as easily as they can, and in the way that they currently do. Surely it's utterly antithesis to the setting and lore.

No, it's not antithesis - utterly or otherwise - to the setting and lore. The setting and lore comes with nil as a reach. In fact, it used to come with a bunch of other reaches but they have been removed.

[Warsong]

No, it's not antithesis - utterly or otherwise - to the setting and lore. The setting and lore comes with nil as a reach. In fact, it used to come with a bunch of other reaches but they have been removed.

Nonsense. Just because a code feature allows something does not automatically make it part of the lore. Nil is part of the lore, but the fact that it lets mages become as powerful as it's possible for mages to get, with the kind of ease and safety that we know is possible, does not mean that's necessarily an IC reality. You can also max steal in a RL week if you're inclined to play that way. Or you can earn a thousand 'sid per IC day abusing Red Storm tailoring. That doesn't mean that's an intentional part of Zalanthan life and society. It's a quirk of the code that creates an OOC reality that conflicts with what should be the IC reality. And I'd say the very same applies to the fact that mages are so easy to max out, and can do it for free and in literally complete safety. The fact that Nil exists doesn't mean all of that needs to be an untouchable fact of Zalanthan reality. More importantly, there's no reason nil couldn't disappear. If anything, a magickal reach seems like precisely the kind of thing that could disappear.

[BadSkeelz]

The setting and lore used to have rape too but we took that out because it added more negatives than positives.

It's not a very persuasive argument, Lizzie.



Magick itself probably needs an overhaul. To quote one old-time magick-loving player, it is the same code system as built by a guy who would sit alone in his custom wizard tower spam-casting.

[Erythil]

Having disproportionate power is one of the primary appeal factors of playing a mage.  We already limit them from:

1. Participating in clans
2.  Participating in many (most?) social and romantic relationships
3.  Renting several types of housing
4.  Wearing finery
5.  Having any kind of leadership position except among their own kind
6.  Using their powers in the greater city
7.  Using their powers to boost a magic-averse populace

And I could go on.

This is a game about character interaction and storytelling.  Mages are severely limited in interactions especially.  A boost to the ease of their gaining magic power is really a sound trade-off, to my mind, and there are lots of people who choose to gain their magic skills slowly, or suppress them, in telling their own particular story.

A bit of the complaints seem to stem from this perception that mages 'have it easy,' and while they have it easy getting codedly strong, they have it hard in many other ways.

[Inks]

The setting and lore used to have rape too but we took that out because it added more negatives than positives.

It's not a very persuasive argument, Lizzie.



Magick itself probably needs an overhaul. To quote one old-time magick-loving player, it is the same code system as built by a guy who would sit alone in his custom wizard tower spam-casting.

This. Take out Nil. I maxed my first four mages easily enough without using nil once. With nil you can easily become skillmaxed while semi-afk.

That being said, being a rogue mage isn't easy, finding people to trust is difficult. As a rogue however using un isn't so hard. Life should be hard for the gemmed. They should be limited. The gemmed are essentially slaves of the city state with extra perks.

[Case]

I think a lot of the magick helpfiles and stuff could stand to be guildlocked too, since it's not like the average person knows any of help magick

[Case]

The setting and lore used to have rape too but we took that out because it added more negatives than positives.

rape is still part of setting and lore

or no more muls
and basically no breeds

it happens off camera. In backgrounds or between NPCs.

[BadSkeelz]

Ahhh, if only magick was too, if only...

I maxed my first four mages easily enough without using nil once. With nil you can easily become skillmaxed while semi-afk.

What kinds of mages were those, if you could say? I imagine the all-Un route is easier for some elements than others.

[Inks]

Ahhh, if only magick was too, if only...

I maxed my first four mages easily enough without using nil once. With nil you can easily become skillmaxed while semi-afk.

What kinds of mages were those, if you could say? I imagine the all-Un route is easier for some elements than others.

The lower karma ones, of course. And it should be that way. Seriously skeelz, are you arguing with yourself now?

If nil was removed it essentially means rogues will become scary faster than gemmed, and I believe it should be that way. When you live free you lack much of the protection of the city-state.

[BadSkeelz]

My interest is to make a game that's as fun for as many people as possible. Just because magick provokes a visceral sense of disgust and loathing in me doesn't mean I can't appreciate the people who enjoy to play it, and the challenges and hurdles they face in enjoying it.

[Inks]

Wasn't biting your head off mate. Basically I think it should be harder to level krathis, elkrosians and the like, from past experience with the emoteless double fireball in 2 seconds. All it would take is removing Nil to put it more in line with mundanes (and even then you will be maxed pretty darn fast with spells more powerful than any mundane skill).

Combat skills take long to master and can still whiff/do not much damage, damage spells often cause consistent high damage and are not subject to the target's defense, as well as being easy to master. It's pretty simple to see while I sometimes enjoy playing gicks and have the karma to do so, I am on the anti Nil reach bandwagon.

I think actual spell and mage power should not be nerfed any further at all, and removing Nil reach would remove my reservations about magicker PCs, as well as being OOCly more respected by the playerbase at large.

[The Silence of the Erdlus]

I don't know what bandwagon I'm on. If nil reach were removed, all I can think about is all the blackened bodies of chaltons and vultures and none of the House hunters getting their chalton hides and vulture feathers anymore because they refuse to touch the desecrated corpses. Its so fucking funny.

[racurtne]

I have one positive thing to say about nil reach. It does help mages practice and then interact without others seeing magick. Seeing magick all the time makes it not scary and not rare. There are circumstances where mundanes will see magick, but I vastly prefer when mages go out of their way to avoid letting people see their magick or its effects. Familiarity with magick is bad for doc enforced role play.

Simply dropping Nil isolates mages and is a horrible inconvenience for them to sit around and wait things out. If you drop nil, which I think would be a net positive, mages should be able to drop spell effects at will, or at least do so within a reasonable amount of time with a command.

I agree with the reasons stated by Badskeelz and Inks about why they think nil should be dropped, with the above addition.

[Inks]

Yeah, waiting for spell effects was the worst part of un only. I agree with Rush there that mages should be able to drop self buffs whenever they want. Nothing is more hilarious than a spell dropping right as you engage some nasty beast, though.

[Delirium]

Magic is the only thing mages can do effectively. Until that changes, mages will want to be effective at magic.

Removing the nil reach would be a huge mistake. I'm actually in the camp of opening up other reaches, but I get that most players can't be trusted with that kind of power.

Don't let your OOC preferences get in the way of seeing to the heart of a problem.

Nil reach is necessary the way the magic system is set up. You would have to make large changes to how spells are maintained and practiced before you removed it.

[racurtne]

I agree that it would need some changes. I think it needs some changes.

Warriors can only warrior and want to warrior effectively too, but they can't fully branch in 5-10 days played.

I'm not trying to be mean here, I just feel like that comment best illustrates my point. I just feel like magickers really do scale up in power extremely quickly and with little effort/risk unless they want to take those risks. They don't even need a partner to help them achieve their goals. Making it risky is attractive to me.

[Is Friday]

There are ways to make magick risky without completely eliminating the option to play a city rogue mage.

[wizturbo]

No, it's not antithesis - utterly or otherwise - to the setting and lore. The setting and lore comes with nil as a reach. In fact, it used to come with a bunch of other reaches but they have been removed.

You're mistaken.

[Inks]

There are ways to make magick risky without completely eliminating the option to play a city rogue mage.

You missed half of racurtne's post where he said the ability to drop buffs should be a thing. Or if you mean you should be able to fireball mon with 0 risk to your pc..no.

[RogueGunslinger]

There are ways to make magick risky without completely eliminating the option to play a city rogue mage.

I feel like this post fits perfectly in the other thread on magickal city protections.