Too Many Gickers? Let's Fix That! (WITHOUT REDUCING THE FUN OF MAGICK)

[Tranquil]

Removing the aspected subguilds and keeping magick to full guilds would solve the bulk of these problems.

A. Magick would still be there, unrestricted. Infact it'd be even more powerful magick-wise considering the full guild elementalists get *more* spells, appealing to the type of players that exclusively enjoy that kind of stuff. ESGs/SGs would still be able to be selected, so they aren't completely useless except for gickery anyhow.

B. It'd remove the fact that mundanes at the moment, are just unabashedly mechanically inferior to magickers. It'd encourage cooperation, however nasty it'd be. You can't survive on your own as a full guild magicker without alot of effort, and it's easier to get a buddy that can give you tubers instead of just doing it all yourself without any interaction whatsoever.

C. At the moment, a mundane has plenty of reason to just be ignored by a Templar. But a gicker? They can instantly be thrown into the action, simply because of their aspect and gem. If you remove the fact that magickers are mundane+, then plot drivers and leaders have much more reason to rely on their mundane servants instead of just using purely magick for their (nefarious) purposes. Why would you bother with a person that isn't gemmed, cannot be controlled, and is just generally weaker in every way, as a Templar?

D. It'd lower the oversaturated amount of gickers in the gameworld right now. Playing a gick wouldn't be you playing a ranger that can throw fireballs. It'd be you playing a gick, and with everything that entails. Being a -badass- magicker would mean something greater, and they'd be much much rarer to see. It'd show how magick should be portrayed in Zalanthas. It's supposed to be rare, dangerous, and powerful. At the moment, a gick is so common to see, most mundane PCs hardly even get repulsed. Can you blame them? I certainly can't.

Whilst it would mean reverting all the work on the aspected SGs, it'd help along the game world in a beneficial way. Sacrificing the 'low fantasy' of Arm isn't worth it, because Arm would lose so much of it's uniqueness. Personally, if the docs/setting was changed entirely to let magickers be normal, I'd also play a magicker instead of ever playing a mundane. Because why not? Nothing to lose from it.

It'd just be desert dudes slinging fireballs and magic missiles at each other, which is a common trope in just about every other fantasy videogame. Not to mention, in most of these fantasy videogames, the magic wielders have down-sides. They are usually flimsier or somehow disadvantaged in their own ways, leading them to have to rely on their non-magical sword and shield wielding compatriots.

In conclusion - make the game less like Final Fantasy. Make it more like Armageddon. This game has it's own niche, and it shouldn't have to be ruined entirely just to accommodate unbalanced subguilds.

[Patuk]

So, first off, I do want to say that the thread's title is something I take issue with. Mages are fun! Armageddon is fun. The goal here should be to make others have more fun, not mage players have less fun instead.

Let's start off with some statistics, so we're all on the same page. Aromit compiled these from a random month in 2020, and he said he'd removed some of the more spoilerish options from it; I think it safe to assume that there'll be sorcerers and psionicists around, too, but here's the list:



So. With that in mind, there's a couple of issues that I'd like to see attention paid to:

1) Gemmed are a stifling and painful presence to deal with

Magickers are dangerous. More dangerous, though, are magickers with official sanctions, impenetrable places to train, and trigger-happy handlers. Gemmed Team Six has been a bit of a gdb meme for years now, and OOCly, Gemmed are a solution in search of a problem: there are many of them around and not so many things they should be doing. For Gemmed, templars' orders are do-or-die situations you were never involved in and that you don't care about. You are a minion they didn't need to work to acquire, are expendable to, and can't escape their reach without fleeing extremely far away. For the subject of gemmed wrath, you are hounded by magickers of various brands who you can't really hit because HAHA good luck infiltrating the vivaduan temple, scrubbo. It isn't a fun dynamic in either direction, and I much prefer that leaders have to work for minions, as well as some opportunity for the game's tagline to shine. Gemmed ain't that.

The obvious solution would just be to axe gemmed completely, likely do the same with declared mages in Luir's, and make templars deal with magickers on the downlow like anything else. This would be a drastic change, but not one to make magickers unplayable; plenty of them are rogues even now. The other change would be to either declare all gemmed Oash's job, or to make directing them the avenue of red-robed Templars only. As-is, blue robe players getting a half-dozen maxed out magickers at their command really is an issue I don't believe is healthy.

2) No clans are magick, but some are less magick than others

Some clans, such as the Allanaki templarate or some tribes, employ certain magickers freely. Some clans, like the GMHs, don't employ them but get to deal with them a bunch. Some clans, which I don't care to mention, aren't supposed to use them at all. It was most notable when Tuluk was open, and you'd occasionally just have magickers wreak havok on the population of a city unable to respond in kind. Things nowadays aren't quite as lopsided.. But even so, it's noticeable when it does happen, and the game turns from bone swords vs bone spears to gatling guns vs whiffle bats.

Solution: I don't know about this one all too much. I'd appreciate for the mundane side of some clans to be buffed, or even just for mundane means of anti-magick to actually exist. Getting swarmed by whirans and rukkians when you have none of your own is a damn pain, and giving rank-and-file clannies a way to fight magickers that are mundane in nature would be nice.

3) Magick offers little counterplay, and IC ignorance makes this worse

Most people reading this thread will have seen what goes on, but I still can't name specific spells. Even so, not all mages are created equally, and some bring stuff that mundanes can't come close to match or even fight. Whirans and drovians are the biggest culprits here; both magickers have ways to disrupt, harass, and kill mundane characters that the latter can't counter without highly specific domain knowledge, which PCs aren't often supposed to have. The result is one where you either metagame intensely to be safe, or become easy prey for either such mage - let alone the others, who are powerful in their own ways too.

Solutions: Drovians were outright removed for a good while, and this didn't break anything, so I'd not mind seeing the aspect responsible for much grief taken out of the game. Whirans, likewise, have travel-related spells that are fine, and PvP-related spells that.. Aren't. If we don't want to nerf or remove anything, though, can we PLEASE have avenues for mundane PCs to learn a bit more about how to defend themselves from such threats? And can we PLEASE have more such avenues exist? As-is, I've been in mundane clans where we knew drovians were haunting us, and the solution boiled down to 'just Way your friends because yeah nothing is safe.' It wasn't a fun dynamic, and I'd like to see less of it.

4) The north hates magickers except there is no way to enforce this

As the title says, magickers have free reign in the north, which is a fantastic area, and any local trying to live as they would just gets whooshed by one windy boi. This has been the case for a decade and it's.. Not great.

Solution: This is a big one, but it'd be fantastic, and I hope it'll be the result of tomorrow's PBRPT: turn everything from the span to the thornlands into a dead magick zone. Elementals, buffs, curses, sorcery, nilazi, everything: it just goes away, and cannot be used while present. You have the entire gameworld to play with, but over here you're as mundane as anyone else. Cheers

[Delirium]

I was discussing this a little more and I think we've identified one of the major contributing factors:

Oppression of magickers needs to come from the top-down. If Templars and nobles are supporting, valuing, or utilizing mage players and punishing mundane characters who speak out against them or who protest their usage in accomplishing objectives-- especially objectives that could have been pursued by mundane means, albeit with a bit more risk-- it forces mundanes to risk disagreeing with, speaking out against, or disobeying the Templarate or the nobility, which carries severe consequences. That puts mundane characters in an unfair position-- either they try to reinforce the gameworld lore and in all likelihood suffer severe consequences, or they're forced to accept magick usage.

It becomes a tug-of-war between the pragmatic coded utility of mages and their subsequent value to accomplishing what high-level characters want to accomplish, and the documentation PCs in power are supposed to be enforcing and representing.

All too often, the utility of mages wins out. IF staff wants magickers to be distrusted and/or reviled by the majority of the player base, then a) mundanes need to be made more useful (see: being able to accomplish coded things that can currently only be accomplished through magickal means), so that mundanes aren't seen as a sub-par solution to problems, and b) oppression of magick users needs to come from the top-down. All too often, mundane characters are NOT in the position to force the gameworld to react how it should to a proliferation of magick usage, and suffer unreasonable consequences for it.

An important thing to decide, currently, is this: what role does staff want to see magick play in the gameworld, both from a lore standpoint and a gameplay standpoint? Should we loosen the stigma against magick, or should we keep it as-is?  What would be best overall for the health, playability, and fun of the gameworld? Then, how do we enforce that view? If magick is to be oppressed, then that needs to be supported by the players in position to oppress magickal characters. Normal, run of the mill commoners can only add flavor to that, they cannot reinforce it in the gameworld.

Players of Templars, Nobles, and other people in power have a responsibility to reinforce the virtual world, and sometimes that means not taking the easy win. Sometimes that means taking risks and choosing mundane solutions over magickal-- but sometimes they're put in the position, due to plots they are involved in, where magickal means ARE the solution. That's okay, because mages need things to be involved in, as well-- but when magickal PCs become the default go-to, something's broken.

There is plenty for mundane character to do and be involved in, but all too often, mundanes end up being, or at least seeming, like the red-shirts of the Bigger Plots, whereas the magick-augmented characters are the heroes of the day. When a long-lived, top-tier fighter character can simply be <redacted> into <redacted> and killed instantly, the question becomes: why bother playing a mundane, unless you're doing so purely to be a red-shirt and are prepared to die?

[creeper386]

Too me a lot of this comes down to potentially a numbers issue. Nerfing mages or reducing options almost always consistently leads to more player loss in watching games throughout the years.

I agree I hate when mundanes get punished ICly for disliking magickers. I've seen it happen that Lord so and so gets upset that someone said bad words to their pet magicker. IMO that sort of thing HAS to stop, if you want magickers to be feared and disliked. You can have IC penalties for fearing and disliking them(Not to say anyone's free to damage a Lord or Templar's pet or anything.)

I haven't played the sub guilds yet. I personally think they look like great options though and would hate to see them go, though do understand the concern people have with having magick and a full main guild along with it. To me I think the sub guilds actually look more interesting and playable then the full guilds ever did, and removing them is a bad choice.

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

Well, I think one real question here is ... do we really want magickers to be feared and hated throughout the entire game world? Do we really want to create more segregation? Personally, I don't.

I do agree with a lot of the ideas concerning how you keep mages down, but I don't want mage players to run out of stuff to do either.

I don't dislike the idea of a magickless North. That was clever, and certainly it could be written into the story.

I don't wanna kill magick plots. I don't wanna reduce the fun for magick players. I don't want to really see magickers all in one clan, either. I don't want to nerf them, really, but I don't want mundanes to be just hapless in the face of all magick, because that's the main issue being brought up here.

I think you can introduce ways for mundanes to level the PK field with mages.I think you can create things that a mundane has the talent to do that mages don't. I think the idea of a devastated land like this having magick-dead zones is a splendid idea. One of the best ideas for locales like this could be relic zones. I would be happy to see psionics get dragged into this balancing act, too.

I do not want to see mages just get squashed. I do want to see a world where mages have their field, and mundanes have theirs, and then there's a field that they both see use on. But I don't want to create a situation where I can no longer work with mages in a sanctioned environment. That's no fun for me, and that's no fun for the game.

[Delirium]

^^^^ what that guy said.

I want to reiterate that I like magick. I just want to see mundanes be equally useful and desirable to play, even if for different reasons and in different arenas. Things that mundanes can accomplish that magickers simply cannot.

How, I'm blanking on right now, but I'm sure the collective creativity of the playerbase can come up with something.

[Strongheart]

I do not want to see mages just get squashed. I do want to see a world where mages have their field, and mundanes have theirs, and then there's a field that they both see use on. But I don't want to create a situation where I can no longer work with mages in a sanctioned environment. That's no fun for me, and that's no fun for the game.

This sentiment precisely. If I wasn't clear before then I will be now: I ADORE magick, I ADORE playing magickers, and I ADORE seeing those roles being played. There has been a handful of ideas here that I am loving, and I just want to say that my solution seems like the easiest to implement as is, which is all I'm getting at. However, it does seem like everyone is aware of the issue more or less, and recognizing there's an problem to begin with is always the first step in solving it.

[creeper386]

Do we really want to create more segregation? Personally, I don't.

When I see a common max players of 20 at any time. And we have a large game world. I think this is something to consider.

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

So, idea number one, assuming we kept everything precisely like it is now class-wise.

Until you cast your first spell, everything functions exactly like it does now. When you cast your first spell, in order to create your mana pool, random amounts are deducted from your Hitpoint/Stun/Movement pools to create it, thus "glass-jawing" you some.

Ex. |100 hp/ 100 stun/ 100 move| becomes |60 hp/ 70 stun/ 72 move/ 98 mana|.

Not an utterly serious suggestion, but it creates some concern for the mage.

[lostinspace]

I think the solution should be less about restricting players from playing mages, and more about making things that mages actually have to worry about.
There is a poison that drains stun, there is a poison that drains stamina, there is a poison that drains health, but I know of no poison that drains mana.
Are there any wild beasts that are overtly/only aggressive to mages? What would a mage-predator look like? Would they even be dangerous to a mundane?

[Patuk]

I think the solution should be less about restricting players from playing mages, and more about making things that mages actually have to worry about.
There is a poison that drains stun, there is a poison that drains stamina, there is a poison that drains health, but I know of no poison that drains mana.
Are there any wild beasts that are overtly/only aggressive to mages? What would a mage-predator look like? Would they even be dangerous to a mundane?

There is a poison that paralyses mages as surely as it does mundanes - peraine. If you can get a shot off, people die, mage or no. The issue is everything leading up to that point more than anything else.

[Fernandezj]

Well, I think one real question here is ... do we really want magickers to be feared and hated throughout the entire game world?

Yes, thats supposed to be how it is. If its not, then things should be updated to reflect the reality that people choose to just not play this aspect.

The issue is, this is not the case, its actually the opposite. There's lots of acceptance, and tolerance, for whatever reason: "Oh I knew them before they manifested", "they are the only players on when I play", etc, etc. Which goes back to... if the case is that magickers are going to be accepted because of whatever OOC realities, then the gameworld needs to catch up.

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

The mana drainer is a good idea, but that really pertains to killing people. To some extent so does anti-mage armor, and a number of other solutions. I don't want to see this just be a primer on how to kill mages to even the power gap. It should be something about how we create need between the parties.

I like the idea of creating needs between the parties, which is part of why I like the idea of "dead zones", or even, "unreliable zones", where your magick might work, or it might not. You could tie the moons to magick more, or at least certain elements or powers. There's a ton of ways to make magickers need mundanes, and visa versa.

But need isn't the same thing as want. You don't have to want, to need. As long as the mages need mundanes, a ton of the original concern posited in this thread is solved. Mundanes could always need magickers for x, y, and z, but if the mages need mundanes for a, b, and c, there's that purpose that mundanes get all of a sudden in the grand scheme of things, besides just Red Shirting.

That example of anti-magick beasts is a pretty good one. If the glitter-shell gurth automatically bypasses magickal defense and is uber aggressive to mages, they're gonna need you to come clear the trading route for them. If that same shell makes anti-magick armor, that's a lose-lose-win? for the mage in getting the gurth cleared.

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

Well, I think one real question here is ... do we really want magickers to be feared and hated throughout the entire game world?

Yes, thats supposed to be how it is. If its not, then things should be updated to reflect the reality that people choose to just not play this aspect.

Mmmm, I kinda think you can have a society (like Allanak) that doesn't feel the utter hate and fear that the rest of the world feels. In that society, you can have mundane people and mages work together for groups, without pretending that they are breaking a rule or something. You can still mistrust mages, and you can be concerned with being around them. Maybe you quit your job because you don't like them. But if I don't quit my job, and I do work with them, in the framework of what I think Allanak really should be, I'm still just average Joe.

I also think that one has to be careful about assuming that working with a mage equates to liking them/not being afraid of them, but then again, presentation is a part of reality.

I just don't like forcing people to not interact in any way but for segregation, especially as we seek to create opportunity and reason for players to play together and not just sit in their compound/temple/apartment.

[Veselka]

One of the questions I have is: What kind of game do we want to have and play in?

ArmageddonMUD is advertised as a "grim low fantasy permadeath RPI". However, most Story plots for the game involve high magic or psionics in some aspect.

When I think Low Fantasy I think Fafhrd and the Grey Mouser, or Conan the Barbarian. Magic does exist in these worlds, but it is grotesque and rare, and the practitioners of it are considered incredibly dangerous and insane. Plots do involve magic in these worlds, but it is often to point out how unpredictable, two-sides, and dangerous magic is, with magic often being the real threat to the practitioner who has hubris or gives a villain monologue speech while the magic or magical artifact is turned against them. In essence, magic in a low fantasy setting is rare and when utilized is for a specific storytelling point. Otherwise, plots are entirely mundane.

I have found since the aspects went in, an increasing "mission creep" of High Fantasy elements into the game world. Be it flashy shows of Templar's to focus on Defilers in a region with no feasible defense beyond luck, when Magic is around it either creates or solves problems. Any issue that can be tackled by a mundane could likely be better tackled by a mundane+magic.

I find I personally don't enjoy this direction. I don't enjoy magic users being ignored or given a long leash. I don't like seeing them treated on a similar playing field as mundanes. It isn't what I signed up for with the games advertisement. I prefer mundane plots 9/10, but the chances of a plot not being intersected by someone manifesting as a magic is quite low these days. It seems every other PC I meet is secretly a mage.

What I would like to see is some quantification of this beyond anecdote. How many PCs in a given span of time (say last year) are magical in some way? How many are pure mundane?

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

What I would like to see is some quantification of this beyond anecdote. How many PCs in a given span of time (say last year) are magical in some way? How many are pure mundane?

Let's start off with some statistics, so we're all on the same page. Aromit compiled these from a random month in 2020, and he said he'd removed some of the more spoilerish options from it; I think it safe to assume that there'll be sorcerers and psionicists around, too, but here's the list:

[lostinspace]

-people die, mage or no.

Maybe poison was a bad example, because anyone can freely utilize peraine, mage or not. What I want are things that are harmless to mundanes, and dangerous for magickers. If a mage and a mundane are fighting, they're both going to want to pull out peraine daggers. The mage is likely in a better situation, as they can shoot fireballs to tilt the scales, something the mundane just can't do. I want the mundane to have the option of, I don't know, hanging out in a silty area because they know magickers that go near there start violently coughing their lungs out.

As long as magick-subguilds exist, giving main-guilds tools is also the same thing as giving magicker-subguilds tools. Magickers get access to a bunch of coded boons/abilities that mundanes don't. Instead of asking to have those coded bonuses removed, I'm asking for the addition of coded negatives that they have to worry about. Both for instances of PK/PVP, but also added to the game world in the form of magicker-poisonous plants, magicker-aggressive creatures, and as someone else brought up, magick dead-zones.

[Fernandezj]

Agree 100% with Veselka. I don' think the issue is that magickers need more ways to interact with mundanes collaboratively, that just reduces societal aversion/stigma (one of the few things I think keeping numbers down).

The issue, at the start of this discussion, is that too many people are playing magickers because of all the advantages, so they are seemingly everywhere. And that "It has watered down the stigma significantly to the point where it feels silly to hate on mages". Making it more acceptable to be a mage, will only increase this problem.

A third of the players being magickal is too many, and this exists because there are no real negatives to playing one other than "you become a tool of the templarate if gemmed" or "have a slightly harder time making friends".

If its as simple as "this is the reality of the gameplay setting", and that magick is more prevalent in the world, and people should be accustomed to more varied interactions and acceptance, then a simple documentation update could cover this. Instead of "Magick is a mysterious and very rare power on Zalanthas, about which the general public knows very little, and generally fears and hates a great deal." you could have:

Code Select Expand

"In recent years, a higher prevalence of magick mainfestations in the world have seen traditional views towards magick shifting.
No longer utterfly feared and reviled, magickers find some status in communities based on their benefit... etc. etc."

Instead of: "In many places, magickers are killed upon discovery, and even the rumor that one is a magicker can lead to one's death.":

Code Select Expand

"An elemental disposition, the rumor of which was once a death sentence, no longer precludes many from living normal lives..."

I don't want the game to go this way, but I'd like it to be consistent with the background and setting. Which it currently is not.

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

... magicker-poisonous plants, magicker-aggressive creatures, and as someone else brought up, magick dead-zones.

A pitch-black, ruby-eyed spider pops into existence next to the wiry, magicky-looking man.

A buff mundane woman fails to protect the wiry, magicky-looking man.
A pitch-black, ruby-eyed spider bites the wiry, magicky-looking man on the neck, wounding him.

A buff mundane woman rescues the wiry, magicky-looking man.
A buff mundane woman dodges a pitch-black, ruby-eyed spider.
A buff mundane woman slashes a pitch-black, ruby-eyed spider, doing horrendous damage.

A pitch-black, ruby-eyed spider pops out of existence in a folding of space.

The wiry, magicky-looking man says, in magicky:
   "Quick, we've got to get going. It'll be back at any moment, and I can't defend against those accursed mana-spiders."

[Brytta Léofa]

The wiry, magicky-looking man says, in magicky:
   "Quick, we've got to get going. It'll be back at any moment, and I can't defend against those accursed mana-spiders."[/tt]

I mean, https://www.armageddon.org/help/view/Nilazi

[hyzhenhok]

Guys, it's the magick subguilds. We don't need complicated coded changes or to remake the cultural setting. All that's needed is to make players choose between being a mage and being an excellent warrior, rogue, or ranger.

The fact that the class system does not force you to make these choices is the culprit of the "everyone's a sekrit magicker" disease. There's no longer a real trade-off for selecting taboo and reviled magickal power for your character. It's the min-maxer's choice for coded power for nearly every character concept ranging from rinthi beggar rogue to thickheaded Byn warrior to tribal wanderer of the wastes. The players who only want to play magickers are not the problem, and trying to make them do something else through direct or indirect nerfs is only going to drive them off. It's the people who want to play something else and then can add on full magick at no cost who have lead to magicker inflation.

I think the suggestion of removing all of the magick subguilds except the touched and reinstating the full-magick classes (maybe tweaked to match the class revamp) is really the best and first option that the game should look at.

[Strongheart]

Guys, it's the magick subguilds. We don't need complicated coded changes or to remake the cultural setting. All that's needed is to make players choose between being a mage and being an excellent warrior, rogue, or ranger.

The fact that the class system does not force you to make these choices is the culprit of the "everyone's a sekrit magicker" disease. There's no longer a real trade-off for selecting taboo and reviled magickal power for your character. It's the min-maxer's choice for coded power for nearly every character concept ranging from rinthi beggar rogue to thickheaded Byn warrior to tribal wanderer of the wastes. The players who only want to play magickers are not the problem, and trying to make them do something else through direct or indirect nerfs is only going to drive them off. It's the people who want to play something else and then can add on full magick at no cost who have lead to magicker inflation.

I think the suggestion of removing all of the magick subguilds except the touched and reinstating the full-magick classes (maybe tweaked to match the class revamp) is really the best and first option that the game should look at.

Totally agree, though....

... magicker-poisonous plants, magicker-aggressive creatures, and as someone else brought up, magick dead-zones.

A pitch-black, ruby-eyed spider pops into existence next to the wiry, magicky-looking man.

A buff mundane woman fails to protect the wiry, magicky-looking man.
A pitch-black, ruby-eyed spider bites the wiry, magicky-looking man on the neck, wounding him.

A buff mundane woman rescues the wiry, magicky-looking man.
A buff mundane woman dodges a pitch-black, ruby-eyed spider.
A buff mundane woman slashes a pitch-black, ruby-eyed spider, doing horrendous damage.

A pitch-black, ruby-eyed spider pops out of existence in a folding of space.

The wiry, magicky-looking man says, in magicky:
   "Quick, we've got to get going. It'll be back at any moment, and I can't defend against those accursed mana-spiders."

Very cool idea nonetheless!

[Strongheart]

I think the suggestion of removing all of the magick subguilds except the touched and reinstating the full-magick classes (maybe tweaked to match the class revamp) is really the best and first option that the game should look at.

And honestly, I'd like to hear staff input on all this. It seems like reverting something is often frowned upon but if we're being honest, all the spell changes would remain while keeping the balance AND allowing for mage players to enjoy their magick play EVEN MORE FOCUSED ON MAGICK without being impacted so negatively and creating minimal effort to fix the situation.

[creeper386]

This discussion happened when there were full mages. Just so everyone knows.

[Dresan]

There are too many muls, halfbreed and halfgiants in the game.



Damn, sorry wrong cycle. Is it thieves?, elves?...ah magick, yeah too many defilers in the game,  fuck those guys.

On a side note, a simple solution extend the regen rate of karma by two or three time. Its really what should have been done once extended sub-guilds became a karma free option. Some subguilds and race options should be special app only and restricted to 1 a year for people.

Not that it would change too much. I would bet anything its the same circle of friends playing those unique roles over and over anyways.   I've been here on and off how many decades now and  I can practically count the amount of magickers i played in one hand.

It feel really hypocritical for people to comment on the subject in some cases. Either they don't have karma to play them, or have played these roles several times already.