I Fixed the Mage Problem

[LindseyBalboa]

I think this should either satisfy everyone or piss people off on both sides, so it seems like a good idea.

Instead of putting an enforced cap on mage players or nerfing mage skills across the board, I suggest:

The more magickers of one element that exist at one time, the weaker those elementals are.

- They all draw from the same finite element so it makes sense

- It enforces a natural cap by making mage players less powerful if there are more of them

- Do you want to cast tier 3 spells and regen mana normally or do you want to stay buddies with your friend who is stealing your element?

- Encourages much more MCB between magickers, causing them to help self-regulate

- Will help to enforce theme in the PC population - that magic is rare and dangerous

[LindseyBalboa]

Idea #2:

 Have mages manifest after CG.

"I met someone and they turned out to be a full mage"
-mage is hard to kill
-didn't really know person as person
-not impactful
-just 'more mages'
-probably has shown utility value of magic making it harder to choose against them

vs

"My friend of 3 in-game years turned out to be a mage - they manifested while hunting with me"
-really good friend
-hard choice to make
-really just mundane rn so way easier to kill, has no subguild skills
-impactful and memorable
-has absolutely no magical utility value to consider at this point


bonus: some mages will die before manifesting, meaning that the world will feel less 'overwhelming magic'
i'd allow mages to manifest beforehand for roles or with spec app etc, but generally - manifest later.

[LetaSpringle]

Con to this idea: no one's background can include knowing they were mages, none of them can have been brought up in the elemental quarter of Allanak.  It limits the backgrounds and forces everyone to roleplay not knowing how to "be" a mage.

Offer some incentive to unmanifested that pre-manifested don't get?

[Nacria]

Every time a mage casts a spell, give them a 1/1000 chance to turn into a one of a kind, exclusive breed of kank with it's own digital deed of ownership "on the blockchain". This way nobles can collect, trade and spend thousands of 'sid speculating on their future value.

[Armaddict]

As noted in the other thread, I don't think weakening mages is exactly the way to go; they're supposed to be strong, stronger than mundane counterparts but with tradeoffs that are centered less on curbing the experience and more on focusing that experience.

I believe playing a rogue mage, or a secret one, should be inherently stressful.  I believe it should be omnipresent in activity, where any given moment could be catastrophic based off of detection, while simultaneously creating an increasing need to subject themselves to the risk of being found out.  I do not believe this is a pure fun role, I think it comes with a lot of responsibility to the game as far as fundamentally fueling what magick is in the game.

Documentation on elementalism is either hidden or not written, but I don't really jive with the idea that elemental planes are so limited in their scope of power.  I like the idea of different elements being able to inflict trouble on each other naturally to feed the natural friction between elements (i.e. Drov and Suk-krath, vivadu and suk-krath, nilaz and all...unless that documentation was changed since I've not checked in awhile), but not to the degree that they all just turn into weaklings because there's more of them.  That seems counterintuitive to me.

There are 3 basic approaches I see here:
1) Address documentation
I don't know if this exactly sets things at ease, but it -does- change the conversation.  Documentation is that it's rare and frowned upon, often hunted.  This is not enforced at the character creation level via caps, only via Karma allocation.  There are other areas where it talks about mages being used rather then disregarded, and we don't seem to follow this part of documentation very well either.  So it is plausible to address documentation first for clarification after staff discussion on the role of mages in the game, so that the conversation can at least be refined down rather than based on individual player perspectives on what the documentation actually says and how it should be applied.

2)Creation of Caps
There is the hard cap option, where there can only be a set number of blah blah and this is enforced via character creation and chargen rather than via karma, since karma distribution based on availability is a daunting task and incredibly faulty.

There is a soft cap option (like the original idea here) where some influence is introduced to create a varying but relatively stable population at some preset level.  This is imo better than the hard cap option, but suffers from its own drawbacks due to player count fluctuation (i.e. If you set the soft cap number at 5 of this element or 35 total subguild mages, but then player count drops, you still have increased density which is the main complaint whenever this discussion arises).

--Sidenote:  My version of this was that you do not know that you can create a mage until entering the game as a mundane.  You don't create 3 mages in a row, you play a mage.  You roll a mundane.  You enter the game.  Comparisons to soft cap happen, rolls are made, you may be hit with a:

'You have sufficient karma and have succeeded in rolling a subguild mage.  Would you like to accept and modify this character to be one of these subguilds? [list of subguilds][Y/N Prompt] You will be put back into character creation chargen with this choice. (List of subguilds based off of success rolls based on caps).

When N is selected:  'Would you like to save this for your next character?' [Y/N Prompt]
If Y, Your next character can be rolled as a full mage or subguild mage, but full mage starts gemmed.  Even while playing your mundane, your next character counts against the soft cap rolls.
If N, you sacrifice this success roll.  Soft cap number is not modified.
If mundane dies with <2-3 days playing time, cap reduced and chance to play mage removed.

This means mage generation is unpredictable, but always possible, insofar as you continue to play mundanes as well, and not even particularly long lived mundanes.  Throwaways still work as long as they're...well...doing things.  Karma modification becomes less about giving permissiont of play, and more about showing trust in the ability to play.

Special applications still available to circumvent this process.

3) Introduction of Roleplay-based, conflict-based mechanisms
As noted, this is my preferred method.  Mages stay powerful.  You still get to choose to play them.  But it is heavily shifted away from a PvE lifestyle; there are significant mechanisms in the game that promote your death, not by gimmick or code, but because this is a highly contested power struggle between players of power structures, their mage colleagues, and unaffiliated mages or troublesome rogues.

I know PvP is not everyone's jam.  But I feel like a lot of Character against character action is necessitated as you move upwards in these raw power structures, as opposed to a purely social one.  I think these would reinforce the world.  I think they make a sort of 'natural' population control while simultaneously allowed for a pretty consistent running of mage characters, and I think if any side becomes too dominant it becomes a great way to introduce an indy or city-based 'quest' or plot to engage in that is high intensity and likely to explain shifting powers or present opportunities to the weaker side.

There is also a LOT of room for creativity in how this could be implemented with those goals in mind where player feedback from all sides, as long as its intellectually honest, could make for some very enjoyable world elements to increase everyones involvement in the scale of things rather than making it a strict partisan affair (i.e. Those who hate mages vs those who love them)

[/list]

[Ammut]

I think this should either satisfy everyone or piss people off on both sides, so it seems like a good idea.

Instead of putting an enforced cap on mage players or nerfing mage skills across the board, I suggest:

The more magickers of one element that exist at one time, the weaker those elementals are.

- They all draw from the same finite element so it makes sense

- It enforces a natural cap by making mage players less powerful if there are more of them

- Do you want to cast tier 3 spells and regen mana normally or do you want to stay buddies with your friend who is stealing your element?

- Encourages much more MCB between magickers, causing them to help self-regulate

- Will help to enforce theme in the PC population - that magic is rare and dangerous

That sounds like the plot of Highlander

[Miradus]

I can't wait to play a mage who goes around killing all the other mages saying, "There can be only one!"

[KakkarotYaBoi]

Or how about this...

Have a cap on max magickers allowed to be in game at any time just like psions and sorcs (10-15, with 5 reserved for gemmers?). These roles can be posted on the CURRENTLY OPEN ROLES section of Staff Announcements. Instead of taking applications for each role and sifting through (walls of text amirite?) have interested parties with the rquired karma send their names in. Put it up to fate, roll the dice, pick a name out a hat, whatever way you want to do it, then inform the chosen 'gicker, flip on that specific magicker class for them, and let them load up normally at chargen.

[Jimpka_Moss]

Just don't die every RL week or two.

Then, all those 'gickers' out there would be people you know by name with your current char, and an actual, living problem instead a vague, pigeon superstition. Something you could form a plot about, even.

You know what fixes an overpowered magicker?

3+ opponents.

[Patuk]

Just don't die every RL week or two.

Then, all those 'gickers' out there would be people you know by name with your current char, and an actual, living problem instead a vague, pigeon superstition. Something you could form a plot about, even.

You know what fixes an overpowered magicker?

3+ opponents.

Mages are every other character in the game. Every other character with their own allies and sympathisers. There aren't three other PCs per mage. The amount of mages in the game would very literally have to be halved for that to be the ratio, and even then mundane PCs are if anything even more divided than most mages are.

[Trevalyan]

The amount of mages in the game would very literally have to be halved for that to be the ratio, and even then mundane PCs are if anything even more divided than most mages are.

Taking this literally, this could mean there are currently forty active mages in a population of about sixty players. It's exceedingly unlikely, given a sphere with an immense hatred of magic and a healthy playerbase.

I'd say that the particular magic-hating sphere isn't divided, at all. Yes, fighting mages is exceedingly difficult, and yes mages have an uncanny capacity to gather allies in a world that should hate them. But it's not guaranteed by any stretch.

[Jimpka_Moss]

I need pictures of spiderman, now.

[Windstorm]

Let's say you mostly played during the most populous times. Like 40-50ish players, every minute you're logged in. For starters, at least half but probably more, are not in your region. So let's say 20ish are in your region. How many are non-humans? Down to 16? Okay! So how many are in another social caste or mostly involved with that social caste and not typically accessible?

Roughly, we're own to 12 now, maybe 10. Generously. Of those, how many are doing or into the same kind of activities, or wind up in a similar bar, or aren't otherwise busy doing skill-increasing, travel, hunting, crafting, whatever. How many are actively making themselves openly available for some interaction?

So we're down to 6? Okay, and how many of those aren't travelling abroad or in just-Waying mode, or hanging out in their clan compound or hanging out with an SO or in a meeting or whatever?

I feel like your typical PC has like 3 or 4 people they can expect to possibly communicate with or meet on a typical day. Well-connnected people have maybe a bit more but most of that's even just through the Way unless they're in the same clan/tribe. Now let's say all is right in the world and they can't possibly interact with a magicker either. How many are we down to? 2? If you're a magicker, how many are we down to? 1? Sometimes 0? Sometimes, it's 0. If you're not always on at peak player times, how much more often do you think that number's at 2, 1, or 0? How about if you're European?

0 isn't fun for anyone. Even the non-magickers. We play this game to roleplay and roleplaying involves interacting at some point. Not having anyone to play with stinks. Even if you have magick, it stinks.

Magickers being at least tolerated and able to find interaction isn't an OH GAWD WE MUST CHANGE THIS thing anymore. It's a playability thing. Magicker players need interaction. So do non-magicking players. So yes, sometimes they interact and sometimes it's not boohiss you should leave the room and go sit alone cuz documentation written when there were 80+ players online says so.. We're playing this to interact. When we get another 30+ players online at a time we can start expecting something to change and that change to be a good thing.

This stands if we lower the number of magickers, too. They'll still want to interact, trust me. Maybe it's best they're more outnumbered than they are, but they'll still want to interact and because player numbers are finite, considerate players will find ways to interact with them and include them in things and that's a good thing.

[Rokal]

Just don't die every RL week or two.

Then, all those 'gickers' out there would be people you know by name with your current char, and an actual, living problem instead a vague, pigeon superstition. Something you could form a plot about, even.

You know what fixes an overpowered magicker?

3+ opponents.

Mages are every other character in the game. Every other character with their own allies and sympathisers. There aren't three other PCs per mage. The amount of mages in the game would very literally have to be halved for that to be the ratio, and even then mundane PCs are if anything even more divided than most mages are.

I'd really like to know where you're getting this impression, Patuk, as it seems like a gross over statement from my recent personal experiences.

Even if it is true, with the average number of players these days, I don't see it as an issue.
As to the original topic:

I like playing mages. I am full on fine with how they are right now, and i honestly think the complaints that there are 'too many mages' are a bit short sighted..Soo..

here is my unpopular opinon: but I consider player characters to be the exception to the norm. Maybe this was different in the past, but these days? Even mundane PCs have the potential to progress to a point they are -far- beyond the average or the norm, living better, surviving, even -thriving- where most of the population struggles by, barely.. While other PCs are who we remain interacting with the most, its kind of small worlding the world of zalanthas forgetting the world that exists and all the background life that goes on in the world. Its something to consider when you're playing. What does your character do in downtime (like when you are offline) what are they actually involved in when they arent on screen time? Do they have family VNPCs in the background? other little hooks?

But then, we have the mages. Lets looked at gemmed, just like mundanes, theres a gemmed population VNPCs that dont amount to much, surviving and just barely getting by. Mages are rare, but a COMPETENT and capable one is even MORE rare.

If anyone as a player wants to RP a character as a status quo, rather than an exception, that's on them, but with how the game is designed and how it reflects on a character's success and growth over time, player characters to me are anything BUT the average, oh sure, PCs can die in all sorts of horrific and easy ways if they aren't careful, but they're also doing things and taking risks that most of the population wouldn't even dream of thinking.

Characters are so much more than what they are mechanically. What one makes of it is on the player.

While PCs are the colour to the painting that is a character, all of that other stuff is the background, wouldn't it just be better to focus on RPing in the world?
Thus, my end point: I don't think any of the changes here are necessary.

As a  frequent mage player, and someone who enjoys playing them a lot, a lot of this is saddening to see.

As mage, I want to bring mystique to the magic.
As mage, I want people to in-character feel fear, wonder, awe, about it.
As a mage, I -want- to expose people to it, because its a reminder its there. That there's that big danger right there, but, potentially, that big savior as well.
As a mage, I expect and want to get bullied for it!

At the core of it, just like any other player: I want to have fun, and those around me to enjoy the presence of magic and its mystique while interacting with my mage characters however they do.

So please, maybe, the next time you see a mage character in game, Dont think : "Oh, how are they going to use their overpowered tricks today? "

Instead: "Maybe I should give a chance at RPing with them, give my character a new experience to think of."

That lonely mage player is probably going to be more than willing to interact, if you give them a chance.

---

So again, No, I don't think any of these changes are necessary.

[Patuk]

Just don't die every RL week or two.

Then, all those 'gickers' out there would be people you know by name with your current char, and an actual, living problem instead a vague, pigeon superstition. Something you could form a plot about, even.

You know what fixes an overpowered magicker?

3+ opponents.

Mages are every other character in the game. Every other character with their own allies and sympathisers. There aren't three other PCs per mage. The amount of mages in the game would very literally have to be halved for that to be the ratio, and even then mundane PCs are if anything even more divided than most mages are.

I'd really like to know where you're getting this impression, Patuk, as it seems like a gross over statement from my recent personal experiences.

Sure, here you go:

https://imgur.com/a/AtgLNkt

[Rokal]

Just don't die every RL week or two.

Then, all those 'gickers' out there would be people you know by name with your current char, and an actual, living problem instead a vague, pigeon superstition. Something you could form a plot about, even.

You know what fixes an overpowered magicker?

3+ opponents.

Mages are every other character in the game. Every other character with their own allies and sympathisers. There aren't three other PCs per mage. The amount of mages in the game would very literally have to be halved for that to be the ratio, and even then mundane PCs are if anything even more divided than most mages are.

I'd really like to know where you're getting this impression, Patuk, as it seems like a gross over statement from my recent personal experiences.

Sure, here you go:

https://imgur.com/a/AtgLNkt

Thank you! Thats insightful: but an observation I'd like to make: in my time being active again, I've never seen the cumulative active players reach more than 30, by this quote - that means 12 of 30 are magickers, and in this -big- a game world, it still makes the impression that they're rare.

All of these characters aren't jumbled into one area, or one single playtime, otherwise i could understand the feeling that there are too many.

[Fredd]

I preface this with: I love the magick system in the game, and want to see it flourish. But sometimes restrictions are needed for things to become their best.

We could just limit the number of each element. More work on staff... But if it's a problem, it's a problem, right? We shouldn't weaken mages.

Other options:

Make being Gemmed a bit less "Safe": This is more or less down to the Southern Templar PC's, but staff could direct them to be a bit more "you're a tool to be used" which would relieve a bit of pressure. Maybe other settlements start reporting misbehaving mages to Allanak, and the Gemmed ones get punished for doing big dumbs.

Why? This would remove a safe way for raider mages to train and be safe, while actively raiding.
 
+

Make being a gemmed less Safe, part 2: We could, you know, stop being nice to mages. Kill them if we see them in the wilds, ect. Why? They're mages. Who care's if they're gemmed. If you hate them, murder them.

Why?: Makes being Gemmed less safe so being a mage is more risky. relieving some pressure.

[Jimpka_Moss]

I love those ideas, Fredd. I think they would improve interaction and roleplay, and make magick at a distance seem less OP and unstoppable, while also giving some people entire plots to do.

[Patuk]

Who's 'we', Fredd? Outside Tuluk, mundane PCs are the minority. A minority definitionally outgunned by stronger PCs. Killing a bunch (and dying over it) is a non-starter

[Fredd]

Who's 'we', Fredd? Outside Tuluk, mundane PCs are the minority. A minority definitionally outgunned by stronger PCs. Killing a bunch (and dying over it) is a non-starter

grab a friend or two. If they outnumber you in the war, then outnumber them on the battlefield.

[Patuk]

Right.