Shields vs Magick

[Pariah]

I don't like that magickers can equal or outclass mundanes at their own skills without restriction.  Would greatly prefer subguild mages to be spec app instead of the norm for that reason.  Full guild mages left a clear role for mundanes in the past, and it was cooler as a result.

I don't think shields would help...it would just make subguild mages even stronger because there's nothing stopping them from using it?

I really dislike that solution a lot - especially because I assume it would cause even more mages to hide away and practice cast until they were rather powerful so they don't feel as much risk in losing their special app. I'd rather see mundanes get a skill boost to incentivize playing them or a higher top end cap on said skills - or both.

Part of what made full mages vulnerable was they didn't have combat skills or really any skills outside of throwing fireballs at you.

They were glass cannons and could still kill a room full of people with a spell or two, but if confronted head on didn't have advanced slashing defense or off/def boosted to raider levels and so on to allow them a huge defensive bonus WHILE throwing fireballs at your face.

Subguild mages are too hardy and survivable.

[BadSkeelz]

We got three options for bringing the game in line with the lore: buff mundanes, nerf mages, or change docs. Right now there's too many mage players that any nerf to them is going to further shatter player numbers.

Mundanes need buffs to be made compelling. Making it so you can actually maybe throw your weight around out there before getting nuked or Blowjobbed is one way of doing it. There's nothing in the docs saying Magick is all that powerful; its place in the world (enslaved by one city, relegated to spiritual roles, or running around doing whatever they feel like, all in small numbers) indicate it's a dangerous but rare and fleeting source of individual power.

If magickers were relegated to no more than 10% of the active playerbase, maybe we'd see something more in line with "the docs" ... or we'd just see very few people playing at all.

[wizturbo]

I really dislike that solution a lot - especially because I assume it would cause even more mages to hide away and practice cast until they were rather powerful so they don't feel as much risk in losing their special app. I'd rather see mundanes get a skill boost to incentivize playing them or a higher top end cap on said skills - or both.

I played for many years prior to subguild mages and the game felt way more balanced then.  I don't mean balanced in a power sense, mages were scary, but they didn't outshine the role of a mundane.  I don't want the subguild mage option to disappear, but limiting frequency here seems like a good direction.

You just don't lose anything by playing one.  Most everything else in the game has a real trade off.

[Pariah]

...

If magickers were relegated to no more than 10% of the active playerbase, maybe we'd see something more in line with "the docs" ... or we'd just see very few people playing at all.

I'd be fine with limiting mages but they've already said no to Karma Timers so the only way that's gonna happen is if staff won't approve back to back mage characters which is essentially non coded karma timers.

So I don't think they are getting limited anytime soon.

Magick is in fact super powerful, maybe docs don't say it, but if you've played a mage till you get that one or those two combat spells unlocked and you're like wow, I am a god.

To make mundanes buffed is just sliding the bar, then after the superhumans take over in that scenario the mage players will just cry their magick isn't enough.

[najdorf]

We got three options for bringing the game in line with the lore: buff mundanes, nerf mages, or change docs. Right now there's too many mage players that any nerf to them is going to further shatter player numbers.

Mundanes need buffs to be made compelling. Making it so you can actually maybe throw your weight around out there before getting nuked or Blowjobbed is one way of doing it. There's nothing in the docs saying Magick is all that powerful; its place in the world (enslaved by one city, relegated to spiritual roles, or running around doing whatever they feel like, all in small numbers) indicate it's a dangerous but rare and fleeting source of individual power.

If magickers were relegated to no more than 10% of the active playerbase, maybe we'd see something more in line with "the docs" ... or we'd just see very few people playing at all.

Buff mundanes via subguilds. Give higher caps, I swear everyone will switch to them.
I suggest these max caps on mundanes, depending on class of course

Assuming some of them are in 80/90 range

Archery: 95 or 100
Backstab / sap: 95 or 100
Combat (kick,disarm, etc.): 95 or 100
Hide: 95 or 100
Sneak: 95 or 100
All crafting: 95 or 100
Weapon skills: 95 or 100

[eska]

We got three options for bringing the game in line with the lore: buff mundanes, nerf mages, or change docs.

Still, these options are only to create balance between classes.

If magickers were relegated to no more than 10% of the active playerbase, maybe we'd see something more in line with "the docs" ... or we'd just see very few people playing at all.

I don't really get what bothers you. Is it having too many mage PCs or mage PCs are too powerful. Magick is rare and the playerbase do not represent the entire population of Zalanthas. Even if all the PCs are magickers, it is still in line with the docs.

[BadSkeelz]

I don't really get what bothers you. Is it having too many mage PCs or mage PCs are too powerful.

Yes.

The biggest problem with magickers is they shoot a hole in their own narrative of being rare and mysterious by being neither. If you assume PCs are supposed to be representative of the general populace (And you should, elsewise you're just enabling snowflakes), the ubiquity of Mages is immersion breaking. If you assume PCs are special and don't follow the rules of the setting, Mages are just play-to-win classes.

[SpyGuy]

On topic:  Shields resisting some direct damage spells would be cool. It's thematic for D&D style adventures, somewhat realistic depending on how it's done and it buffs shield use a tiny bit.  Wouldn't do a single thing to alleviate my concerns about magick though, just makes fireball slightly less useful against a prepared opponent.

Off topic: I'm probably one of the biggest haters of the state of magick in the game but I have to say it's never been about the PK scene for me.  If anything, most mages seem to leave mundanes alone.  It's the deviation from the theme of the game of magick being special that gets me.  Makes playing a mage fearer/hater an isolating experience.  Fully mundane commoners are the new special unique snowflakes of Armageddon MUD and that's just weird.

[Patuk]

Mundanes feeling outclassed by Magickers is an underlying problem. I dunno if this is really a solution to it but I imagine that's the driving impetus.

It's not a solution, because mages are every bit as good at shield use (and often straight-up better).

It's somethin', though.

[Riev]

Heeyyyy what about not mixing discussions here. This isn't about how many magickers there are.

I want Shield Use to feel like a more solid option than it is now, even after the combat rework. It supposedly helps to stop arrows (no it doesn't) and some people think it would be cool if it helped mitigate a fireball or two. Let it WRECK THE SHIT out of the shield, let the target still take decent damage, but give it an option to feel good.

Please stop arguing the same shit in multiple threads. You're ruining the idea of a discussion by repeating the same argument in every topic. This isn't about docs, or number of mages. This is "can we make shields block certain magick attacks without ruining magick entirely"