Armageddon General Discussion Board

Hey, split off the the World Discussion thread on Magickers here: http://gdb.armageddon.org/index.php/topic,50796.0.html (http://gdb.armageddon.org/index.php/topic,50796.0.html)

How do you feel about Nil reach? Personally I don't like that a Magicker can "fake" their spells in order to level them quicker.

Quote from: Incognito on March 12, 2016, 02:48:23 PM

Quote from: RogueGunslinger on March 12, 2016, 02:43:46 PM
You lost me. What does finding the right words have to do with un or nil?

1) Nil uses less mana than Un.
2) Nil can be used to figure out spell word combos without casting the spell with a "real effect".

But lets please get back on topic, we can discuss the worth of Nil in another topic!

Nil uses less mana than un? I'm fairly sure that's not true, but I could be misremembering. Neither of these two points are reasons that a Nil reach is required. I would even argue that figuring out new spell-word combinations when you branch a new spell should require using it to its full effect.

I like the idea of the Gem giving Nil reach. Because being gemmed can come with huge drawbacks. And Gemmed need some way to not have visible effects on them when they move around the city. Having to wait for them to go away sucks balls.

do not discuss the finer points of magick please.

I play lots of magickers.  I seldom, if ever use nil reach out of principle, and probably most of my PCs have -never- used nil, and I've played all flavors before, so it is definitely not required.
I remember one good IC argument for nil and that was a preserver not wanting to use niliazi magicks "out loud" but wanting to explore their potential in case of SHTF emergencies.

Lack of 'nil' is not game breaking in any way, simply an OOC inconvenience to those who prefer the easy road.
A krathi/elkran should not be able to survive inside the magickers quarter or their hidden apartment for a few IG years, then walk out and Hiroshima a three block radius without ever having really experienced true magick.

I would like to see a code that would allow nil to branch from un at the same rate as a normal mundane skill if not even the same rate as a weapons skill, and THEN maybe have something else branch from nil.  This would give magicker players a long term goal to pursue since they normally hit the coded glass ceiling much earlier than combat PCs.  It would also slow the rated of magicker growth over time which isn't really bad for anyone.

A magicker out in the wild using their magick to survive -should- be stronger than someone who never left the city.
RL example: A mountain man will always be better at survival than someone who has spent all their life reading survival books and watching survival videos on YouTube.

Edit: Nothing to see here.

Posting on the go, but what is my outlier option? I proposed the removal of nil over a month ago. I'll dig up my argument for that later.


In the meantime, Delenda est Magick.

Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 12, 2016, 05:05:07 PM
Posting on the go, but what is my outlier option? I proposed the removal of nil over a month ago. I'll dig up my argument for that later.


In the meantime, Delenda est Magick.

Was wondering that myself :D

It's the poll option intended to lure your vote away from the options for people who actually enjoy magick being in the game. Really though it's just a bad joke.  ;D

No. As the code stands, it would make all hidden/city bound magick unplayable.

Not to say that it's playable in the first place. It's a direction I don't want to see it move in.

I kind of like the idea and kind of don't. Nil is mostly for practice, but there are situations in which it can become interesting RP, especially for magickers who take a more ceremonial/spiritual approach.

Quote from: Jingo on March 12, 2016, 05:28:20 PM
No. As the code stands, it would make all hidden/city bound magick unplayable.

Not to say that it's playable in the first place. It's a direction I don't want to see it move in.

Well, you're not wrong. Having both the current city magical omniscient defence thing and removing nil reach alike does seem like it'd be overkill.

Move the Nil reach to be a branched skill.  Starting 'gickers would have to develop some skill with their innate abilities before they have the experience/ability to manipulate power to "no effect."

Thank you everyone who's voted for me without knowing what I was going to say. Let's Make Armageddon Great Again!

I'm in favor of restricting or getting rid of nil. I believe it has a negative effect on magicker code play, on magicker roleplay, and on their perceived place in the game.

From a code stand point, without getting in to whether it's better or worse for your skill progression, let's look at what nil actually lets you do: skill up in complete safety. This lets a magicker fully branch their guild with less risk than someone trying to skill up ride. If an assassin could sit in an apartment and repeatedly type >backstab (no target) for a few days and come out at master backstab, would any of us be cool with it? Of course not. It'd be ridiculous. Why are we cool with magickers being able to do it?

"Because some spells are too dangerous, or because it would lead to the death of the magicker." Good and excellent reasons to remove nil, in my opinion. Spells should be something dangerous and feared, not only by the populace but by inexperienced magickers themselves. A rogue mage should be nervous with these powers. A rogue mage should be fearful of being found out. Cities probably developed in Zalanthas partly to help normal people sniff out these dangerous freaks. Nil gives magickers a safety bubble to play in that no other character (except Red Storm tailors) is privileged to.

And what does this give the rest of us? It gives us magickers who hide in caves, apartments, and temples, grinding up their spells until they feel safe enough to announce themselves to the game world. It's rare to meet the inexperienced magicker, especially outside of a city. It's common to meet the powerful, dangerous, "respect me for I am branched" magicker. And because they're common, they become difficult to respect. They become difficult to fear. They're just another product of a twinky code, ambushing the rest of us and deforming plotlines by their presence. The best you can hope for is that their player is responsible or that they leave you alone.

I would like to see magickers working together, and with other characters, to master their powers. Give them a chance to talk, to experiment, to roleplay off of each other. Give them more incentive to be part of the game world other than a fully branched laser light show projector. Let them engage in the world earlier, so that they might die more... but also so that the powerful ones are truly feared and respected.

Because I want Magickers to be a part of the world and not just skilling up in isolation, I think the current restrictions on the Gemmed temples of Allanak need to be rescinded. Anyone wearing a Gem (or a Templar medallion) should be able to enter a temple and roleplay with whoever they find there. Give a chance for a community and culture to develop instead of a bunch of disjointed characters torn between wanting to interact and wanting to skill up.

An earlier post on the topic. (http://gdb.armageddon.org/index.php/topic,50482.msg924167.html#msg924167)

And then you need to sit on your ass for three hours in a room, alone anyways. Because you wanted to practice your sul enchantment, waiting for it to wear off.

Once again this is not the way to fix magick in arm.

The real problem is that there isn't anything for magicker to do BUT skill in a cave and then terrorize the countryside. The game has become obsessed with isolating magick. And the result is isolated magickers.

Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 12, 2016, 06:03:37 PM
Thank you everyone who's voted for me without knowing what I was going to say. Let's Make Armageddon Great Again!

I'm in favor of restricting or getting rid of nil. I believe it has a negative effect on magicker code play, on magicker roleplay, and on their perceived place in the game.

From a code stand point, without getting in to whether it's better or worse for your skill progression, let's look at what nil actually lets you do: skill up in complete safety. This lets a magicker fully branch their guild with less risk than someone trying to skill up ride. If an assassin could sit in an apartment and repeatedly type >backstab (no target) for a few days and come out at master backstab, would any of us be cool with it? Of course not. It'd be ridiculous. Why are we cool with magickers being able to do it?

"Because some spells are too dangerous, or because it would lead to the death of the magicker." Good and excellent reasons to remove nil, in my opinion. Spells should be something dangerous and feared, not only by the populace but by inexperienced magickers themselves. A rogue mage should be nervous with these powers. A rogue mage should be fearful of being found out. Cities probably developed in Zalanthas partly to help normal people sniff out these dangerous freaks. Nil gives magickers a safety bubble to play in that no other character (except Red Storm tailors) is privileged to.

And what does this give the rest of us? It gives us magickers who hide in caves, apartments, and temples, grinding up their spells until they feel safe enough to announce themselves to the game world. It's rare to meet the inexperienced magicker, especially outside of a city. It's common to meet the powerful, dangerous, "respect me for I am branched" magicker. And because they're common, they become difficult to respect. They become difficult to fear. They're just another product of a twinky code, ambushing the rest of us and deforming plotlines by their presence. The best you can hope for is that their player is responsible or that they leave you alone.

I would like to see magickers working together, and with other characters, to master their powers. Give them a chance to talk, to experiment, to roleplay off of each other. Give them more incentive to be part of the game world other than a fully branched laser light show projector. Let them engage in the world earlier, so that they might die more... but also so that the powerful ones are truly feared and respected.

Because I want Magickers to be a part of the world and not just skilling up in isolation, I think the current restrictions on the Gemmed temples of Allanak need to be rescinded. Anyone wearing a Gem (or a Templar medallion) should be able to enter a temple and roleplay with whoever they find there. Give a chance for a community and culture to develop instead of a bunch of disjointed characters torn between wanting to interact and wanting to skill up.

An earlier post on the topic. (http://gdb.armageddon.org/index.php/topic,50482.msg924167.html#msg924167)

Good points.

I would point out that there are IG reasons for how the temples were restructured, as well as OOC ones.  Changing the one will require changing the other, which is within the hands of our Staff.

Believe me, it's kind of my fault the Temples got changed in the first place (If you count "not bothering to follow up suspicious characters carrying Loony Toon bombs into the temples" as my fault). I didn't like it then and don't like it now. As much sense as it makes IC, I think it's gameplay negatives outweigh the benefits.

Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 12, 2016, 06:19:29 PM
Believe me, it's kind of my fault the Temples got changed in the first place (If you count "not bothering to follow up suspicious characters carrying Loony Toon bombs into the temples" as my fault). I didn't like it then and don't like it now. As much sense as it makes IC, I think it's gameplay negatives outweigh the benefits.

I, too, am not a fan of the change.

However, I will also admit that that is just a gut reaction.  I have not played a magicker in a number of years, not since long before the razing of the temples.  My knowledge of IG dynamics in Allanak is limited right now and should probably be taken with a grain of (purplish)salt.

..Hell, I haven't even had a new character since the "starting shops" during character creation were put in and have no idea what they look like or what's in them other than "starting items like clothing and sundry starting-items."

I honestly don't give a damn what the IG pretext is supposed to be. Preventing gemmed congregation is a play ability issue that makes the game needlessly unfun.

It's like closing the Tuluki Arena all over again.

I actually thought it would be cooler to have the gem limit the nil reach, so that there was some sort of incentive for the whole 'freeeeedom!' call for mages and thus more ungemmed, and thus more...involvement, from the city, in finding the ungemmed, and more plotz.

But then I couldn't think of a way to make it make sense that way.  Thought too far ahead.  Bah!

I will say the argument that mages need to be more integrated into society is old.  The segregation is part of the role, the same as half-elves being shunned, elves being hated, and so on.  *trails off into the distant world of every other magicker thread ever made, where that exact discussion has been had hundreds of times*

We probably shouldn't make this thread about that.

Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 12, 2016, 06:03:37 PM

And what does this give the rest of us? It gives us magickers who hide in caves, apartments, and temples, grinding up their spells until they feel safe enough to announce themselves to the game world. It's rare to meet the inexperienced magicker, especially outside of a city. It's common to meet the powerful, dangerous, "respect me for I am branched" magicker. And because they're common, they become difficult to respect. They become difficult to fear. They're just another product of a twinky code, ambushing the rest of us and deforming plotlines by their presence. The best you can hope for is that their player is responsible or that they leave you alone.

An earlier post on the topic. (http://gdb.armageddon.org/index.php/topic,50482.msg924167.html#msg924167)

...and the rest of this particular post.

According to my list o-characters, I've had 32 characters, half of which have been mages. Out of 16 mages I've played in the past ten years, zero fit what you describe above. Most of the mages I knew of, what I've interacted with, were fresh out of chargen and newly gemmed. They showed up in the bar, found a templar publically, announced themselves to be what they were, got the gem publically, and everyone pretty much knew exactly what they were from that point on.

That's in Allanak.

Outside Allanak, most of them were secret, because they had to be secret for 100% IC reasons. Rogues are called rogues for a reason. Tribals were not secret, within their tribe and rarely stayed inside the relative safety of their tribe for very long before venturing out - at which point they weren't secret to anyone else in their tribe's territory either.

I use nil all the time when practicing certain spells. It takes me a LOT longer to branch than people who use it less often, but I really hate being stuck outside the gates for possibly hours just because I happen to have some visible magicks on and have no immediate way of getting them off. And - some of those spells, even at the lowest possible power, can last a few real-life hours. The ONLY way to practice it without sequestering yourself for those same hours you complain we sequester ourselvers, is to cast at nil.

So really, the only people I can think of who are doing what you are complaining about, are the ones who are doing it at un, and *cannot* leave their caves, holes, temples, etc. until their spells wear off.

Going with "yes" here because I don't believe that changing nil solves the problem with magickers. If anything, I think it would add more problems.

The problem with magickers - as I see it, as people have voiced it in the past, and as I think people are hinting at here - is that they have a tendency to sit around in their temple (or hideout) spam casting spells while semi AFK for hours on end, and when they finally emerge after 5 days played they've fully branched and mastered their entire spell tree. Obviously I'm embellishing a bit, but this is the gist, no?

• 
  From the perspective of the mage this is bad because, before you can be codedly useful, you have to sit around by yourself spamming rather than gaining friends or a sense of your character. Worse than that, if you actually do hang out with other mages, the scene is interrupted every 5 minutes by some dill hole whose mana just filled back up, and who couldn't possibly be bothered to have fun now and grind later when has nothing better to do.  
• 
  From the perspective of mundane players, this is a bad system because it means that mages can sit in a temple, isolated from the rest of the world, and become extremely powerful without ever having to risk their character once.

Removing nil altogether is a bad solution to these problems, because while it makes training your powers slightly dangerous (yes, only slightly) it makes the things you need to do to train them a bit ridiculous. And a good number of players will do ridiculous things to train, karma or not.

• From the magicker perspective, a few things happen. For your attack spells, you'll either need to blast yourself like some kind of masochist, or you'll need to wander 6 rooms west into the desert and blast chaltons like some kind of sadist. Same goes with buff/debuff type spells. If you're casting attack or debuff spells on yourself you'll be wanted and have to spend even more time sitting alone in your temple to wait out your crimflag timer. If you're casting buff spells on yourself, you'll have to spend even more time sitting alone in your temple waiting for the effects to wear off. So either you end up behaving like a fucking retard, or you end up spending more time alone. Neither is good.
• From the mundane perspective, we'll have to find IC ways to voice our concern that the mages have all combined into some kind of antelope hating cult. Every time you go out to hunt, expect to look west and see someone blowing up a fucking antelope like an even more deranged version of Tim from Holy Grail... Don't kid yourself, mages won't go out and attack something dangerous like a scrab. They won't go any further from the gates than they have to, and they will fight chalton because chalton aren't dangerous. You'd do the same thing. It'll be the new weighted stilt lizard boxing grind maneuver, and you won't like it.

Making nil a branched reach is a little less bad (not to be confused with "better") because at least it leaves a legitimate path to branching which doesn't involve Donald Trump levels of chalton hatred.

• From the mage perspective this means that you'll have to sit around in your temple casting buff spells on yourself and waiting hours for them to wear off before you can go out to do anything fun. Once you've finally buffed yourself with "un" enough times to branch "nil", you can finally start casting your attack spells safely. This doesn't necessarily make it harder to grind in total safety, it just makes it take longer and thus makes you feel more isolated.
• From the mundane perspective, this slows down branching by like 2-3 days played TOPS. However, it doesn't eliminate the "risk free" option of grinding. Also, it will still result in chalton blasters as not everyone will want to wait that long to start working on their attack spells.

Making Nil a perk of the gem is a simply horrendous idea. Gemmed mages already get a burglar-proof, quit/save temple where they can max out without any risk to their character. They don't need any more perks. The only way I would entertain this idea is if it was balanced out with significantly increased spell failures, or a sizable reduction in mana (currently the gem gives you slightly MORE mana), or a reduction in overall spell power. (Less damage, or less numerical buff/debuff, shorter durations, etc.)


What would I recommend? Probably nothing. I don't play mages that often any more because "the mage problem" as I described it simply isn't fun for me, most of the time. Something needs to be done, but I don't have many good ideas of what that is, admittedly. But nerfing nil will just cause more or different problems - it won't solve problems.

Quote from: Lizzie on March 12, 2016, 07:01:01 PM

Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 12, 2016, 06:03:37 PM

And what does this give the rest of us? It gives us magickers who hide in caves, apartments, and temples, grinding up their spells until they feel safe enough to announce themselves to the game world. It's rare to meet the inexperienced magicker, especially outside of a city. It's common to meet the powerful, dangerous, "respect me for I am branched" magicker. And because they're common, they become difficult to respect. They become difficult to fear. They're just another product of a twinky code, ambushing the rest of us and deforming plotlines by their presence. The best you can hope for is that their player is responsible or that they leave you alone.

An earlier post on the topic. (http://gdb.armageddon.org/index.php/topic,50482.msg924167.html#msg924167)

...and the rest of this particular post.

According to my list o-characters, I've had 32 characters, half of which have been mages. Out of 16 mages I've played in the past ten years, zero fit what you describe above. Most of the mages I knew of, what I've interacted with, were fresh out of chargen and newly gemmed. They showed up in the bar, found a templar publically, announced themselves to be what they were, got the gem publically, and everyone pretty much knew exactly what they were from that point on.

That's in Allanak.

In BadSkeelz' argument here, "announce themselves to the game world" does not mean "tells the population of Allanak that they are a mage". It means "starts to make their presence and influence felt in plots and in the game."

He's referring to this progression:

Start Play ----> Grind ---> Grind more ---> Grind more ---> Maxed (or close) ---> Plots.

He's saying the progression should look more like this:

Start Play ----> Interaction with other PCs and plots -> Maxed (or close) ---> More plots

He is saying that the gemmed mage in Allanak should not be able to just sit in the Temple and grind to max power. He's saying that the rogue mage should not be able to sit in 100% secrecy and grind to max power, and then start making waves.

BadSkeelz didn't call for a particular solution to the problem besides removing Nil (and there should probably be one). But your description of your gameplay corroborates his reasons for wanting it removed (though I don't think removing Nil would solve the problem).

All that seems to stands in the way of removing nil is the fact that you can't easily get rid of spells you've cast on yourself. There's a litany of bulletproof reasons why nil is awful and completely gamebreaking, making a magicker literally the very easiest and safest kind of maxed-out character to obtain (aside from the hurdle of getting to play one, anyway), but without a way to cause that stoneskin you cast to go away again, removing nil would make it nearly impossible to play anything but a cave-sitting hermit. So instead of taking that as a reason to do nothing about this self-evident problem, the obvious solution seems to be to simply make it so that if you can cast a spell on yourself, you can also uncast it. It even makes sense, right?

Quote from: Lizzie on March 12, 2016, 07:01:01 PM

Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 12, 2016, 06:03:37 PM

And what does this give the rest of us? It gives us magickers who hide in caves, apartments, and temples, grinding up their spells until they feel safe enough to announce themselves to the game world. It's rare to meet the inexperienced magicker, especially outside of a city. It's common to meet the powerful, dangerous, "respect me for I am branched" magicker. And because they're common, they become difficult to respect. They become difficult to fear. They're just another product of a twinky code, ambushing the rest of us and deforming plotlines by their presence. The best you can hope for is that their player is responsible or that they leave you alone.

An earlier post on the topic. (http://gdb.armageddon.org/index.php/topic,50482.msg924167.html#msg924167)

...and the rest of this particular post.

According to my list o-characters, I've had 32 characters, half of which have been mages. Out of 16 mages I've played in the past ten years, zero fit what you describe above. Most of the mages I knew of, what I've interacted with, were fresh out of chargen and newly gemmed. They showed up in the bar, found a templar publically, announced themselves to be what they were, got the gem publically, and everyone pretty much knew exactly what they were from that point on.

That's in Allanak.

Outside Allanak, most of them were secret, because they had to be secret for 100% IC reasons. Rogues are called rogues for a reason. Tribals were not secret, within their tribe and rarely stayed inside the relative safety of their tribe for very long before venturing out - at which point they weren't secret to anyone else in their tribe's territory either.

I use nil all the time when practicing certain spells. It takes me a LOT longer to branch than people who use it less often, but I really hate being stuck outside the gates for possibly hours just because I happen to have some visible magicks on and have no immediate way of getting them off. And - some of those spells, even at the lowest possible power, can last a few real-life hours. The ONLY way to practice it without sequestering yourself for those same hours you complain we sequester ourselvers, is to cast at nil.

So really, the only people I can think of who are doing what you are complaining about, are the ones who are doing it at un, and *cannot* leave their caves, holes, temples, etc. until their spells wear off.

bolded part captures exactly how I feel on the matter.

I voted no. You can't learn to use a firearm without running some live ammo through that bitch!

i once 'spamcasted' spells for about an hour.

i sent in a report.

i was noted for doing this, and did not do it again.

i emoted and used thinks every few minutes or so, just to not be afk.

i still got noted.

trust me, staff see this stuff.

you are not hiding.

You know what I think the optimal solution is? Nerf gemmed mages.

What is the gem for? There's not a published explanation, but I guarantee it's some form of control. This ain't Tuluk, you're not getting an impenetrable castle to live in and +5 mana out of the goodness of Tek's heart. He's reigning you in, or siphoning your mana, or something. And since he's leashing you, I think it would make more sense to make gemmers less dangerous. Maybe they have 10% higher spell failure. Or -20 mana (minimum 50, as with HGs). Or their spells are 25% less powerful; less benefit from buffs, less penalty from debuffs, less damage, less duration, etc. As a trade off for this, you get a burglar-proof castle to live in, 50% of the city's inhabitable "commons" area, and the nil reach.

But if you're NOT gemmed, you get no negatives, but you also don't get the nil reach. This makes rogue mages much scarier, but much harder to play also because leveling will entail running up to scrabs unarmed and spamming in your spells. Many will die trying. Also, it adds this perk Armaddict mentioned.

Quote from: Armaddict on March 12, 2016, 06:44:23 PM
I actually thought it would be cooler to have the gem limit the nil reach, so that there was some sort of incentive for the whole 'freeeeedom!' call for mages and thus more ungemmed, and thus more...involvement, from the city, in finding the ungemmed, and more plotz.

"Buuut... that nerf is too much nerf?" Not really. It would hit combat-based mages (Rukkians, Krathis, and Elkrosians) pretty hard, but everyone's favorite temple sitters - whirans, vivs, and drovs - would remain fairly unchanged.  As an added perk, we could give Templars the option to "remove <target>'s gem" or something. That way, when a war mage is really needed, they would quite literally be letting one "off the leash." I think this would encourage Templar-Gemmer plots quite a bit.

Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 12, 2016, 06:03:37 PM
Thank you everyone who's voted for me without knowing what I was going to say. Let's Make Armageddon Great Again!

I'm in favor of restricting or getting rid of nil. I believe it has a negative effect on magicker code play, on magicker roleplay, and on their perceived place in the game.

From a code stand point, without getting in to whether it's better or worse for your skill progression, let's look at what nil actually lets you do: skill up in complete safety. This lets a magicker fully branch their guild with less risk than someone trying to skill up ride. If an assassin could sit in an apartment and repeatedly type >backstab (no target) for a few days and come out at master backstab, would any of us be cool with it? Of course not. It'd be ridiculous. Why are we cool with magickers being able to do it?

"Because some spells are too dangerous, or because it would lead to the death of the magicker." Good and excellent reasons to remove nil, in my opinion. Spells should be something dangerous and feared, not only by the populace but by inexperienced magickers themselves. A rogue mage should be nervous with these powers. A rogue mage should be fearful of being found out. Cities probably developed in Zalanthas partly to help normal people sniff out these dangerous freaks. Nil gives magickers a safety bubble to play in that no other character (except Red Storm tailors) is privileged to.

And what does this give the rest of us? It gives us magickers who hide in caves, apartments, and temples, grinding up their spells until they feel safe enough to announce themselves to the game world. It's rare to meet the inexperienced magicker, especially outside of a city. It's common to meet the powerful, dangerous, "respect me for I am branched" magicker. And because they're common, they become difficult to respect. They become difficult to fear. They're just another product of a twinky code, ambushing the rest of us and deforming plotlines by their presence. The best you can hope for is that their player is responsible or that they leave you alone.

I would like to see magickers working together, and with other characters, to master their powers. Give them a chance to talk, to experiment, to roleplay off of each other. Give them more incentive to be part of the game world other than a fully branched laser light show projector. Let them engage in the world earlier, so that they might die more... but also so that the powerful ones are truly feared and respected.

Because I want Magickers to be a part of the world and not just skilling up in isolation, I think the current restrictions on the Gemmed temples of Allanak need to be rescinded. Anyone wearing a Gem (or a Templar medallion) should be able to enter a temple and roleplay with whoever they find there. Give a chance for a community and culture to develop instead of a bunch of disjointed characters torn between wanting to interact and wanting to skill up.

An earlier post on the topic. (http://gdb.armageddon.org/index.php/topic,50482.msg924167.html#msg924167)

I agree, next up, sparring with training weapons gives no coded benefit to increasing your weapon proficiency, in fact, you have to fight for real in order to increase it. Oh and also let's have the buy code to where if you fail a haggle, the npc doesn't forget you and also raises the price on you.

Sparring requires two people. This makes it at least 100% better than nil spell training.

I understand that maybe some people here may not like the mage characters, but why do you feel the need to try and get things nerfed even further?  I don't understand why you feel it is necessary to make it more difficult for newer players to even want to try something new and different.  What pleasure do you derive from suggesting horrible ideas to make life within the game even more difficult?  If you want it to be difficult, request code so that it affects you and you alone, and I am all for it.

I find it invigorating, honestly. I also don't think the idea is horrible, I really think not using nil would be better for magicker play.

Quote from: frankjacoby on March 13, 2016, 04:28:58 AM
I understand that maybe some people here may not like the mage characters, but why do you feel the need to try and get things nerfed even further?  I don't understand why you feel it is necessary to make it more difficult for newer players to even want to try something new and different.  What pleasure do you derive from suggesting horrible ideas to make life within the game even more difficult?  If you want it to be difficult, request code so that it affects you and you alone, and I am all for it.

I like mages. I don't think they should have Nil. New players don't have anything to do with this suggestion, it would affect older players just the same. Why are you trying to diminish peoples opinions as if they only hold them out of malice or spite.

We all play this game, and some of us have opinions you're not going to agree with. It's not a personal attack on you, your characters, or the way you play. It's just people trying to make the game better by making suggestions.

Quote from: frankjacoby on March 13, 2016, 04:28:58 AM
I understand that maybe some people here may not like the mage characters, but why do you feel the need to try and get things nerfed even further?  I don't understand why you feel it is necessary to make it more difficult for newer players to even want to try something new and different.  What pleasure do you derive from suggesting horrible ideas to make life within the game even more difficult?  If you want it to be difficult, request code so that it affects you and you alone, and I am all for it.

I love playing magickers.  I'm the "Magick is Awesome" Party Leader of the GDB.  And I strongly believe Nil should be removed as a starting reach for all elementalists (but not sorcerers).  I've played more than one magicker who never used 'nil' for RP reasons, and not only is it possible to codedly advance, I found it to be significantly more fun than the alternative.

Some further arguments for why this would be good:

• Newer players aren't playing magickers.  They require 2 karma minimum, and some degree of staff trust before they'll let you even special app one.
• Second, if Nil were removed, a major anti-magicker argument would evaporate.  Learning magick would be risky, like any other powerful skill in the game, and players will feel an advanced magicker has 'earned' their power.  This also makes things much cooler for the magicker.  It's much more bad ass to be an advanced mage when becoming an advanced mage is actually difficult.
• Most importantly to me, this change would draw more magickers out into the world instead of being encouraged to find a hidey hole and spam cast.  It would create content for the game, as these players are out there being drawn into plots or conflicts.  It would also greatly encourage young elementalists to find a mentor, as the 'teach' command would be the safest and most effective means of learning to use magick, as it should be!

Also to make sure my point is clear, I am not advocating for Nil to be removed from the game.  Nil should remain in the game, but should be gained through other, non-skill up related means.

Play a magicker that only uses UN.
Play a magicker that only uses NIL.
The checks and balances are already very much in place.

Nil existing is already a point of roleplay, considering reaches are something technically learned and not magickally given (it is just a spell word afterall) I could see having this be something that is spread icly and given primarily to the gemmed via the gem to reflect knowledge in the quarter? However I don't think it would really add anything to the game.

Nil makes playing a mage easier for a newer player. I'm all for that.

Quote from: frankjacoby on March 13, 2016, 04:28:58 AM
I understand that maybe some people here may not like the mage characters, but why do you feel the need to try and get things nerfed even further?  I don't understand why you feel it is necessary to make it more difficult for newer players to even want to try something new and different.  What pleasure do you derive from suggesting horrible ideas to make life within the game even more difficult?  If you want it to be difficult, request code so that it affects you and you alone, and I am all for it.

I can't even play a magicker yet. Might never do so, even if I get the karma. But I think the points BadSkeelz and the people against nil make sound pretty solid to me. Nobody should be able to sit in some place and become the very best. You play a MUD for the MULTI USER aspect. You're supposed to interact with other people, even if you're just flipping them the bird every now and then.

Quote from: BrokenRomance on March 13, 2016, 07:16:17 AM

Quote from: frankjacoby on March 13, 2016, 04:28:58 AM
I understand that maybe some people here may not like the mage characters, but why do you feel the need to try and get things nerfed even further?  I don't understand why you feel it is necessary to make it more difficult for newer players to even want to try something new and different.  What pleasure do you derive from suggesting horrible ideas to make life within the game even more difficult?  If you want it to be difficult, request code so that it affects you and you alone, and I am all for it.

I can't even play a magicker yet. Might never do so, even if I get the karma. But I think the points BadSkeelz and the people against nil make sound pretty solid to me. Nobody should be able to sit in some place and become the very best. You play a MUD for the MULTI USER aspect. You're supposed to interact with other people, even if you're just flipping them the bird every now and then.

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.

Hi there!

I'm still quite new to the magick in ARM but have been researching extensively on the GDB and help files in the hope of wrapping my head around it and one day playing an elementalist of some kind. I'm particularly interested in the social implications and how this might affect an individual having to struggle against that and the progression of his/her craft which must be a calling for many.

At least two of you referenced the fact you did not use NIL for RP reasons. This is really intriguing and I'm curious what kind of angles you took to RP this. Anything you can share without going into sensitive character background?

I'm basically hoping for a complete overhaul of the magick system myself. Or at least a way to introduce more progression systems that don't involve failing casts.

Maybe there's some kind of middle ground where a caster would need do more than practice with the nil reach to atain complete mastery of a spell but still be useful in some aspects when practicing.

I dislike this idea and don't think it could work without major changes to some spells. Some spells simply aren't meant to be practiced repeatedly at the un reach. If staff were ever seriously considering this change, I would be happy to point out spells that won't work in any practical way without the nil reach.

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

Quote from: dravage on March 13, 2016, 10:10:48 AM
At least two of you referenced the fact you did not use NIL for RP reasons. This is really intriguing and I'm curious what kind of angles you took to RP this. Anything you can share without going into sensitive character background?

Pretty simple, I role played them as believing that using nil couldn't possibly make them stronger than if they practiced for real.  One of those PCs was combat oriented and it's pretty realistic to have that belief.  They were more interested in being able to cast their magick under pressure, and thought the wimpy mages that stuck around in their temple all day would never be their equal.

One of those characters was also a teacher and liked to make crude analogies comparing magick to sex.  They taught that using Nil was like pulling out, or never finishing, and that it was unhealthy and unnatural.  

Another one of them believed that using Nil would weaken his link to Drov, and eventually that damage would be too great, severing their connection all together.  Oddly enough that character actually advised others to use Nil often, because he wanted them the be weaker than him.  

Quote from: flurry on March 13, 2016, 01:38:46 PM
I dislike this idea and don't think it could work without major changes to some spells. Some spells simply aren't meant to be practiced repeatedly at the un reach. If staff were ever seriously considering this change, I would be happy to point out spells that won't work in any practical way without the nil reach.

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

I've played nearly every elementalist, or deeply interacted with every type of elementalist and I cannot think of a single spell that could not be practiced effectively without nil.  Not a single one.

Funny. I can think of dozens and I haven't played all the elementalists. It's just an awful idea.

I think you two are differing in your understandings of the phrase "practiced effectively", not over your opinions of specific spells.

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.

Is this "effective"? Jingo says no, Wizturbo says yes.  I'm inclined to agree with Jingo. 

Quote from: wizturbo on March 13, 2016, 02:40:01 PM

Quote from: flurry on March 13, 2016, 01:38:46 PM
I dislike this idea and don't think it could work without major changes to some spells. Some spells simply aren't meant to be practiced repeatedly at the un reach. If staff were ever seriously considering this change, I would be happy to point out spells that won't work in any practical way without the nil reach.

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

I've played nearly every elementalist, or deeply interacted with every type of elementalist and I cannot think of a single spell that could not be practiced effectively without nil.  Not a single one.

I agree with IAmJacksOpinion. In addition, there are spells that cannot be just - removed. And some of those spells take a long time to wear off. For reasons (eg: Blue-Robe Templar et al), it is not *practical* to cast them on yourself unless you have damn good reason to do so, OR are planning on not being in Allanak for an extended length of time. It's not practical to use un to work on improving that spell, or several others. Yes, you can. But you have to be playing a character who either a) doesn't hang out in Allanak, b) spends most of their time in the elemental quarter and you have no need to leave it.

Either way, you're pretty much ensuring that your character will be iso, or spam-cast in their temple til they're already fully branched and no longer have to practice at all. Currently, we don't have to do that. We can spam cast if we want - but we can also cast at nil for 10 RL minutes and spend the rest of the hour hanging out and RPing with other people.

I didn't want to bring up templars because I don't know if that was considered game info or not. But yeah. Templars will stop you from walking around with enchantments.

If you're hidden, this means that practicing is impossible while you're in/planning to stay in the city. Without nil.

I can see the benefits of this. It would probably slow mage progression down.

However, I can think of a lot of reasons why this would become a headache.

For any long-term effect spell, waiting for them to wear off would be a chore. I really do think a mage should be able to strip their own spells from themselves, and that would ameliorate things.

There are some spells that casting without nil are again a nuisance. One of the big reasons above.

Things that would help no nil work:

• Ability to remove your own spell effects.
• Ability to branch nil, possibly other things afterwards. ;)
• No automagickal detection in cities of everything. Or make it more limited.

Gemmed mages already have a way to remove spell effects in their Quarter.  It isn't IC sensitive information, they can buy dispel magick from the Krathi at the Temple of Suk-Krath for 30 coins per cast.

If they want to practice magick without leaving the city, and have the freedom to leave the Gemmed quarter, they can pay for it.  More coin sinks are not exactly a bad thing in the game.

As for practicing magicks in the city while trying to be a rogue, the magickal protections thread is closely paired with this topic.  Right now, that isn't much of an option anyway. 

Gemmed mages already have a way to remove SOME spell effects in their Quarter.  It isn't IC sensitive information, they can buy dispel magick from the Krathi at the Temple of Suk-Krath for 30 coins per cast, which may or may not be successful, and cost more sids per cast, and can sometimes take several tries (and cause the NPC to make you wait up to an hour for final completion, which STILL only works on some - not all - spells).

It is the ones the NPC *cannot* remove, and the times that take the NPC multiple attempts and 30 sids per attempt, that create a problem with using nil exclusively to be impractical. Not impossible, but impractical, and for many people, unplayable.

Again - it causes mages to continue to hole up in the elemental quarter, NOT interacting until they have branched enough that they don't need to practice at all anymore.

For the same reason, making a person wait to *branch* nil is pointless. You don't need it once you're branched. You need it mostly in the beginning, not nearly as much in the end, of your magickal practice journey.

Also. Non-gemmed? Anyone?

Am I going to be walking up to this guy as an unsanctioned mage and ask him to cast on me?

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

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

Quote from: Lizzie on March 13, 2016, 08:00:52 AM
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.

Quote from: flurry on March 13, 2016, 01:38:46 PM
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.

Quote from: IAmJacksOpinion on March 13, 2016, 03:56:31 PM
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?

Quote from: Jingo on March 13, 2016, 05:44:18 PM
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).

Quote from: Erythil on March 13, 2016, 05:44:56 PM
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.

Quote from: Erythil on March 13, 2016, 05:44:56 PM
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

Quote from: Erythil on March 13, 2016, 05:44:56 PM
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?

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-.

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.

Quote from: Warsong on March 13, 2016, 07:40:58 PM
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.

Quote from: Lizzie on March 13, 2016, 07:45:57 PM
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.

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.

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.

Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 13, 2016, 07:51:44 PM
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.

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

Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 13, 2016, 07:51:44 PM
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.

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

Quote from: Inks on March 13, 2016, 08:02:26 PM
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.

Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 13, 2016, 08:15:57 PM
Ahhh, if only magick was too, if only...

Quote from: Inks on March 13, 2016, 08:02:26 PM
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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

Quote from: Lizzie on March 13, 2016, 07:45:57 PM

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.

Quote from: Is Friday on March 13, 2016, 11:52:04 PM
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.

Quote from: Is Friday on March 13, 2016, 11:52:04 PM
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.

Quote from: Delirium on March 13, 2016, 11:07:04 PM
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.

Gonna +1 because this is the gist of it.

The only way no-nil works is by overhauling the system.

Quote from: RogueGunslinger on March 14, 2016, 01:54:43 AM

Quote from: Is Friday on March 13, 2016, 11:52:04 PM
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.

Fits just fine here. While we're talking about limiting magick users, we can also talk about how they've been limited already.

Removing 'nil' ain't gonna make nobody happy. Let's go over the possible consequences as predicted in this thread:

• Magickers sit in their caves for longer because they have to wait for their spells to wear off: We're back to magickers sitting in caves instead of interacting with the game world, and still just coming out of hiding when they're branched. Which will encourage them to spamcast more, because what else are you going to do while waiting for your spells to wear off? Better just get it all out of the way at first.
• Magickers come out to interact with the world before being fully branched: Which just means instead of having magickers saying, "Fear me, for I wield coded power that could screw you over!" you'll have magickers saying, "Fear me, for the docs say you should, even though I'm a weeny!" and you'll be experiencing magick more in the day-to-day of Armageddon.

The problem is that the game has shifted so much over the years from the place of magick in the past - a feared, secretive force that nevertheless you might be able to work with in real, day-to-day circumstances (in some cases) to "All magick is evil and makes you want to eat babies," being the default commoner position. The code doesn't support the latter position, and so either it needs to change or the magick system needs a complete overhaul.

I support a complete overhaul, but then, I like WFRP.

Either way, removing 'nil' won't help - it will just exacerbate matters.

Quote from: racurtne on March 13, 2016, 11:35:43 PM
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.

Some spells are so dangerous and so uncontrollable that no one would ever volunteer to BE a partner. That's a huge downside. Other combat classes CAN spar in relative safety. Magick classes cannot spar using their magick in relative safety. In addition, other combat classes, if they find someone who can defend really well against them, can engage in a spar that could easily last 20 RL minutes, with each partner taking a shot against the other every second, or even more frequently. Magick classes attempting to be "better" at the spells they have, can cast twice - possibly three times, and then they have to stop completely until they regenerate enough mana to cast again. They *cannot* cast again, until they stop combat and rest. So they'd cast cast - disengage - sit for 5 minutes. Then get up, cast cast, disengage, sit for 5 minutes.

As I said before - yes, you CAN use un and never use nil. Some people prefer it that way. And that's great. Most people find it too impractical, and it forces us to play a much more aggressive, forceful, obvious role, thus further shoving us into iso roles which most other players never see until we are so powerful they'd have a tough time stopping us. That is EXACTLY what you think you're trying to stop by insisting on getting rid of nil. All that will do is force more of us to do that.

With my scant amount of clout in the community, feel free to take this with a glittering cube of salt.

If you remove the nil reach, and have mages learn their way out in world, then the onus needs to shift back to PCs to treat mages as if they are in fact, scary, dangerous, and going to curse you and all potential children. Does that mean you should tuck tail and run, everytime? No. Rally a posse, report them to soldiers, get a group of friends and might makes right them all to death, fine. But walking into a room of outdoor proportions, spotting someone invoking the power of the gerber baby, and leaping at them with weapons drawn is a little silly. A fresh out of the box warrior, will bone sword to death a fresh out of the box mage all day long. Maybe I'm already jaded, but I have found I can't trust some players to actually want to interact with others, without making sure they take advantage of codedly getting the jump on the other person.

Additionally, without going too far into the veil of magick, typing:
em growls
then  'kill amos' works 100 % of the time.

Whereas:
pem The ground rumbles under @me feet, as #me takes a deep breath, ^me fist shaking at ^me side,
then Cast 'wek un death laser' amos, works far less reliably until codedly competent (not to mention some spells don't even have an effect until further along in progression)

Quote from: Case on March 13, 2016, 08:05:54 PM
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

Umm... they are?

->help spell fireball
Looking for skill 'Fireball'.
You don't have the skill 'Fireball'.

I'm down for anything that makes it harder for magickers to exist.

Yes....yesssss...suffer magickers....suffer....

(http://uthmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Cedricdead.jpg)

Quote from: IAmJacksOpinion on March 14, 2016, 08:31:26 AM

Quote from: Case on March 13, 2016, 08:05:54 PM
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

Umm... they are?

->help spell fireball
Looking for skill 'Fireball'.
You don't have the skill 'Fireball'.

I think she means like: help magick sphere, help magick reach, help magick basics etc rather than spell files.

Personally I think it's nice to be able to see how the magick system works on principle, so people assessing the game can kind of get a glimpse.

But it's almost interesting to think what would be the case if the helpfiles didn't have the words. So you'd have to find out in game or make inferences what 'threl' means. But really, it would just effect new mage players so I don't think it's feasible.

This is another reason why the whole nil/un situation is even a discussion on the GDB: because the help files tell people exactly what they are for, and everyone can read the help file. Your mundane character shouldn't know there are more than one way to cast a spell. And if you've never played a mage before, YOU shouldn't know that there are more than one way to cast a spell.

I don't think any of this stuff should be "okay" for mundane characters to know about, let alone discuss openly.  So I'm totally with Case about the docs needing to be guildlocked, just like the spells are guildlocked.

Not because you, the player shouldn't know. But because if it's not there, you know your *character* shouldn't know. What you do from there is up to you and your RP, but its absence from the public help files sets a "ground rule" that you can decide whether or not to break ICly.

Quote from: Lizzie on March 14, 2016, 07:22:04 AM
Magick classes attempting to be "better" at the spells they have, can cast twice - possibly three times, and then they have to stop completely until they regenerate enough mana to cast again.

My last witch could only cast once. There's that possibility for witches too.

Quote from: Lizzie on March 14, 2016, 09:31:14 AM
Your mundane character shouldn't know there are more than one way to cast a spell. And if you've never played a mage before, YOU shouldn't know that there are more than one way to cast a spell.

I totally get the first part, even though I'm not sure why anyone ICly would want to know or could benefit from knowing. But I'm curious as to the second part.

I'm pretty new and I've never played a magicker - I don't have the karma to do so anyway. But why should that stop people like me being able to read about magic in the game world and how it's roughly composed? I.e. What are the actual arguments against this? That people can somehow exploit that information?

Like Bogre said, it's a nice way for people to become interested in the role picks who wouldn't otherwise have a clue about how complex they are to play, the social implications, if it's tricky to play from a code perspective, so on and so forth. Having read through the help files I'm definitely intrigued and would love to play one one day. Limiting all that information to IC means only would never have given me the same perspective or interest to play, not least because my character is highly unlikely to inquire to any great depth without fearing their head would explode.

Just some thoughts from a new player's perspective.

I agree, please keep these help files public. When I was new, the interesting magick system was one of the things that attracted me to the game, having come from MUDs where magic was lame "cast 'magic missile' kobold" kind of stuff. You don't ever really understand it until you try it anyway.

EDIT: As for taking away the nil reach, the more I think about it the more I realize that the consequences of this would be both unwanted and hilarious. Fearing having these spell effects lingering on them for ridiculous periods of time, you'd have magickers casting buff spells on random critters all the time. So if you're out hunting, you'll always have to worry about whether or not chalton #1928384 has been granted the Invisible Swirling Force Field of Doom or not. Or maybe you'll take a look at that gortok you're fighting and realize it's glowing with an unholy aura. Oops!

This kind of experimentation is cool and all...as long as it's just a few nil-nixing magickers doing it. If all mages are compelled to do it all the time, you're going to have a problem, hah.

Quote from: dravage on March 14, 2016, 10:49:26 AM

Quote from: Lizzie on March 14, 2016, 09:31:14 AM
Your mundane character shouldn't know there are more than one way to cast a spell. And if you've never played a mage before, YOU shouldn't know that there are more than one way to cast a spell.

I totally get the first part, even though I'm not sure why anyone ICly would want to know or could benefit from knowing. But I'm curious as to the second part.

I'm pretty new and I've never played a magicker - I don't have the karma to do so anyway. But why should that stop people like me being able to read about magic in the game world and how it's roughly composed? I.e. What are the actual arguments against this? That people can somehow exploit that information?

Like Bogre said, it's a nice way for people to become interested in the role picks who wouldn't otherwise have a clue about how complex they are to play, the social implications, if it's tricky to play from a code perspective, so on and so forth. Having read through the help files I'm definitely intrigued and would love to play one one day. Limiting all that information to IC means only would never have given me the same perspective or interest to play, not least because my character is highly unlikely to inquire to any great depth without fearing their head would explode.

Just some thoughts from a new player's perspective.

Because there's an "implied permission" involved. If it's available for anyone to read in the official Armageddon docs, it's "acceptable" for your character to know about it. It sets the wrong example for players who don't spend a lot of time reading the opinions on the GDB, but do spend a lot of time reading the docs. For example - I didn't even know the GDB existed when I first started playing. I read the official docs, and not even all of them. I basically jumped on in. By the time I'd read the GDB, I had already picked up some bad habits because of my ignorance, which was assuming that if it's on the documentation, and not *specifically excluded* (as in a "What your character does NOT know" doc, which doesn't exist), it was fair game.

Quote from: Lizzie on March 14, 2016, 07:22:04 AM
Magick classes attempting to be "better" at the spells they have, can cast twice - possibly three times, and then they have to stop completely until they regenerate enough mana to cast again.

Or they can cast ten times before they need to regen mana. It's certainly not black and white and not everyone regens the same.

Quote from: dravage on March 14, 2016, 10:49:26 AM
Like Bogre said, it's a nice way for people to become interested in the role picks who wouldn't otherwise have a clue about how complex they are to play, the social implications, if it's tricky to play from a code perspective, so on and so forth. Having read through the help files I'm definitely intrigued and would love to play one one day. Limiting all that information to IC means only would never have given me the same perspective or interest to play, not least because my character is highly unlikely to inquire to any great depth without fearing their head would explode.

Just some thoughts from a new player's perspective.

I agree 100% that anyone should be able to read the magick help files.

Quote from: Lizzie on March 14, 2016, 11:12:06 AM
Because there's an "implied permission" involved. If it's available for anyone to read in the official Armageddon docs, it's "acceptable" for your character to know about it. It sets the wrong example for players who don't spend a lot of time reading the opinions on the GDB, but do spend a lot of time reading the docs. For example - I didn't even know the GDB existed when I first started playing. I read the official docs, and not even all of them. I basically jumped on in. By the time I'd read the GDB, I had already picked up some bad habits because of my ignorance, which was assuming that if it's on the documentation, and not *specifically excluded* (as in a "What your character does NOT know" doc, which doesn't exist), it was fair game.

Uhhh. There's tons of information in the docs that is absolutely NOT okay for your character to know. Getting rid of all of it takes away a ton of the depth and uniqueness that makes the game appealing to new players researching it.




I wish the people saying the Nil is required for some spells would clarify or expand somewhat. Because they're either lying to help their point or are massively exaggerating the risks and underestimating the methods to avoid those risks. Because in my experience that simply is not the case.

I personally use the fuck out of Nil on my mages and probably forever will because its fairly clear most people think it's important. But if I can get by leveling a damage-spell against myself, without using Nil then what the hell other spells are so dangerous that having to cast it on something else is going to make the guild suddenly useless? I can think of common spell type, which SHOULD be massively fucking dangerous, that would be irritating but not at all impossible to raise without nil.

I do leave room for the fact I could be missing something, since everyone who's saying it is being vague as hell, I can't be sure.

Do people roleplay knowing that sort of stuff in-game as mundanes?

I've never once in my entire "career" seen a mundane mention knowing any of that....ever. If I could recall a single instance of someone roleplaying deep knowledge of the spheres and reaches etc I might see the point but I can't. (I would also have reported them, but I've never once been given a reason to.)

Maybe they are all talking about it when I'm not around, but, it seems like a non-issue in my experience.

I briefly had a mundane PC that had a surface-level understanding of that kind of stuff, because they had IC reason to. I hope you wouldn't have reported me!

Also, obviously Oash nobles and to an extent, mundane employees would have some knowledge of the magick system.

But yeah, I've never seen a mundane PC that just knew about the minutae of magick because it was in the docs and no other apparent reason.

Quote from: dravage on March 14, 2016, 10:49:26 AM
I totally get the first part, even though I'm not sure why anyone ICly would want to know or could benefit from knowing. But I'm curious as to the second part.

I'm pretty new and I've never played a magicker - I don't have the karma to do so anyway. But why should that stop people like me being able to read about magic in the game world and how it's roughly composed? I.e. What are the actual arguments against this? That people can somehow exploit that information?

There are two camps to this one.
1) Is that all sorts of IG information, anything that is not "public knowledge", should be found out by the player IG.  This has the benefit for new players that their characters are (by default) as ignorant of things and how they actually work as the player themselves is.  You base your reactions on what you can learn from the public docs and that's all.  The downside is that this also gives veteran players a chance to nuance their reactions that new players don't have.  The player doesn't unlearn.  Consider this the hardcore "No Spoilers" approach.  You want to know what happens in The Force Awakens?  Watch the movie.  Don't talk about it.  Also you don't get to know how long the movie is, or if it is part of a trilogy or a standalone.

2) Things like Reach are game mechanics.  If there is no documentation of it, then new players suffer if there is also not adequate IG tutelage.  You may play multiple characters that are mages and never learn some mechanic or be hindered in the growth of your character because you, the player, do not know how to "level up".  This is a downside to some new players and huge advantage to the veterans that played enough to know these mechanics.  On the mundane side?  This is like no one ever telling you to sleep if you're damaged so much that your hp won't regen or that burning through all the materials a crafter is given in a single hour doesn't advance your skill as much as failing a couple of times and going to do something else, then failing again.

Here's the only argument needed for the justification of Nil reach - ICLY.

There are many IC reasonings, for not wanting to cast certain spells or groups of spells, depending on a player's wish or a PC's background.

For example (without even going into IC details) : You might want to play a peaceful mage and not want to cast any aggressive spells at Un in your lifetime.

Forcing EVERYONE to have to cast at Un, ALL the time, is not only unreasonable, but unrealistic too.

Does anyone have an IC and OOC justification for removing Nil?

How is the existence of the Nil reach currently detrimental to mages, or to others?

How will removal of Nil reach improve gameplay?

Removing nil will make it so that magickers have to go out "into the world" more often to "level their spells", if I understand it correctly.

It should in theory add more danger, and thus more meaning/more feelings of accomplishment to the player, to becoming a powerful magicker.

Quote from: Incognito on March 14, 2016, 11:45:32 AM
Does anyone have an IC and OOC justification for removing Nil?

IC - Not so much.  OOC is pretty easy.  You don't get better at hitting a target with a gun by holding the gun and saying "BANG! BANG!".  You don't improve at free-throw shooting by standing on the line and shouting "SWISH!".  You want to learn how to effectively apply an explosive to breech a door?  You blow open a whole bunch of doors.  You don't magickally know how effective the charge is, or how much collateral damage is coming by setting it and then agreeing with yourself that it was done right.

OOCly, NIL reach appears as an easy out for veteran magickers to skill up without any risk.  You run to your hidey-hole, burn through your mana, and then go do something else.  No muss.  No fuss.

Quote from: Incognito on March 14, 2016, 11:45:32 AM
How is the existence of the Nil reach currently detrimental to mages, or to others?

Used correctly?  Probably isn't.  Possibility and perceived abuse is what folks seem to argue against.

Quote from: Incognito on March 14, 2016, 11:45:32 AM
How will removal of Nil reach improve gameplay?

It probably won't.  In fact, it will just prompt a call that magicks should expire while logged off just like alcohol poisoning does.

Quote from: Desertman on March 14, 2016, 11:49:44 AM
Removing nil will make it so that magickers have to go out "into the world" more often to "level their spells", if I understand it correctly.

It should in theory add more danger, and thus more meaning/more feelings of accomplishment to the player, to becoming a powerful magicker.

Can we skip through the GDB hate cycle right right now to head it off?

"There's too much magick in the world/mage players aren't playing true to the documentation that it should be rare/I'm tired of seeing a mage every 2 rooms outside the gates."

Quote from: Pale Horse on March 14, 2016, 11:56:31 AM

Quote from: Desertman on March 14, 2016, 11:49:44 AM
Removing nil will make it so that magickers have to go out "into the world" more often to "level their spells", if I understand it correctly.

It should in theory add more danger, and thus more meaning/more feelings of accomplishment to the player, to becoming a powerful magicker.

Can we skip through the GDB hate cycle right right now to head it off?

"There's too much magick in the world/mage players aren't playing true to the documentation that it should be rare/I'm tired of seeing a mage every 2 rooms outside the gates."

While I agree with that, I'm not talking about that.

Someone asked a question. I was answering their question.

But you can do whatever you feel is enjoyable for you personally?

Here's a thought....

Think of using Nil as sparring with dummies. You'll learn, but at a much slower pace. (not as if you're slashing your sword in the air).

Uh. Magick SHOULD expire when logged off.

Quote from: Incognito on March 14, 2016, 12:10:58 PM
Here's a thought....

Think of using Nil as sparring with dummies. You'll learn, but at a much slower pace. (not as if you're slashing your sword in the air).

I could think of it that way, but it isn't that way, or if it is it's such a minuscule effect as to be negligible.


Not to mention you can't use sparring dummies to raise anything other than off/defense and only for a very, very tiny amount.

Quote from: Desertman on March 14, 2016, 11:57:44 AM

Quote from: Pale Horse on March 14, 2016, 11:56:31 AM

Quote from: Desertman on March 14, 2016, 11:49:44 AM
Removing nil will make it so that magickers have to go out "into the world" more often to "level their spells", if I understand it correctly.

It should in theory add more danger, and thus more meaning/more feelings of accomplishment to the player, to becoming a powerful magicker.

Can we skip through the GDB hate cycle right right now to head it off?

"There's too much magick in the world/mage players aren't playing true to the documentation that it should be rare/I'm tired of seeing a mage every 2 rooms outside the gates."

While I agree with that, I'm not talking about that.

Someone asked a question. I was answering their question.

But you can do whatever you feel is enjoyable for you personally?

I should preface my posts.

I wasn't critiquing your idea, though it apparently came across as such and I apologize.  I was showing my pessimism that any change made to bring more magickers out into the open (as it were), will naturally show more magickal plots/actions even if only one or two spells are shown during a single 'gicker's play session.  To everyone else, it looks like a lot of magick.  To that one player, it was just two spells.  Some will (rightly, from their view) claim that there is too much magick being shown for whatever reasons they feel are valid (they don't like magick, they think its being abused, they like magick but think it should be more rare, etc).  The mage players will (rightly, from their view) be a confused/hurt/offended since they were trying their individual best to limit their obvious magickal effects and that it was only some players who weren't being true to the documentation and around and around and around we go..again.

I don't see any need to hide the magick docs currently visible, for reasons others have already laid out. I've never met a mundane who knew any of it (without a manifestly clear reason).

I also didn't really understand how lame nil was until I started playing a mage, especially a Gemmed mage.

I also hate magick much more strongly as a player than any of my characters do. So there's that.

One time, there were at least two magickers using un spells -ALL OVER THE WILDERNESS- which set off a signal of some kind if the room was entered. I entered a little less than thirty of these in two real life days. I shouldn't really need to explain what that did to my 'magick is rare and scary' meter. We shouldn't go in a direction where this happens to other people too.

Quote from: The Silence of the Erdlus on March 14, 2016, 02:24:07 PM
One time, there were at least two magickers using un spells -ALL OVER THE WILDERNESS- which set off a signal of some kind if the room was entered. I entered a little less than thirty of these in two game days. I shouldn't really need to explain what that did to my 'magick is rare and scary' meter. We shouldn't go in a direction where this happens to other people too.

Bad players will play bad. There's absolutely no reason to do that, even if Nil was removed people should not do that, because it makes no sense, and isn't needed.

Player behavior will trend towards the "bad" when given enough opportunity and incentive, however. Right now magick code is structured to encourage constant hideout casting. Forcing the mages in to the real world does risk repeating what Silence experienced.

I was talking with IsFriday about this last night and he suggested that nil should only be a useful levellng tool up to about 70% of a spell's power (or whatever is deemed appropriate). You can learn the basics with nil, maybe even proficiency, but to obtain "master class" you need practical experience with the skill. To me this seems like a good compromise.

I like that idea.

I could dig the 70% thing.

I want to like the 70% thing, but it still feels like an arbitrary compromise. From the perspective of the chalton it's still "Order 66". For mundanes, it still means senseless displays of magick, and for magickers it still means you spend most of your time spamming in a cave.

Maybe it's a bit better, but it's still an air freshener sitting on a manure pile.

Quote from: IAmJacksOpinion on March 14, 2016, 03:45:29 PM
Maybe it's a bit better, but it's still an air freshener sitting on a manure pile.

I think if you really want to get rid of that manure pile, you have to figure out where to move it to. The proper place of magick in the game is as open a question of "how can we make magick as it is now less broke/overpowered/obnoxious/restrictive/unfun." Shoot, answering "what is the proper place of magick in the game" is probably the first step to answering all the other questions.

Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 14, 2016, 03:50:30 PM
Shoot, answering "what is the proper place of magick in the game" is probably the first step to answering all the other questions.

Quote from: Pale Horse on March 14, 2016, 04:05:06 PM

Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 14, 2016, 03:50:30 PM
Shoot, answering "what is the proper place of magick in the game" is probably the first step to answering all the other questions.

http://gdb.armageddon.org/index.php/topic,50804.0.html (http://gdb.armageddon.org/index.php/topic,50804.0.html)

Was going to make it a poll but couldn't think of decent poll questions.

I have an idea! Get rid of nil, and require all non-mages to volunteer for mandatory weekly target practice.

Cause - if you don't, you'll probably end up being target practice anyway. I've never liked PKing. But if I had to play a mage who was *required* via the code to use UN to become more powerful, you can bet your bottom dollar there'll be more PKs coming from my characters. I'm not gonna spam-practice on chalton. Just not gonna happen.

Good. That conflict is better than casting nil in a temple until you can PK in one shot with maxed spells.

That argument isn't even one.

She's saying that she would cast it on PCs. Which would suck, but might perpetuate the Final Struggle against Magick and get us to the optimal point where wearing a Gem in the Gaj gets you ganked before you hit Caravan and Commoner's.

I got it. My point is those PCs would have a far better chance if she made that choice instead of spamcasting at nil to mon and then just zapped people she didn't like.

It's the players choice whether to PK or not and that argument is 100% invalid.

Can we be real for a moment? Burglars, assassins, and pickpockets all do the same exact "practice till mastered before really playing their guild" strategy. It's not just a problem with magickers.

Quote from: Inks on March 14, 2016, 06:52:25 PM
I got it. My point is those PCs would have a far better chance if she made that choice instead of spamcasting at nil to mon and then just zapped people she didn't like.

It's the players choice whether to PK or not and that argument is 100% invalid.

You missed the part where I said I don't like PK AT ALL. I don't like that part of roleplay. I avoid it. I avoid PKing, because I don't like doing it. I've intentionally PKed maybe - 4 characters in over 10 years of playing. I didn't like doing any of them.

But if it was a choice between spam-casting on chalton just to get to the next power level, or practicing on other characters, and nil was no longer a choice, I'll practice on other characters and fuck my record of avoiding PK like the plague. I'll just join all the other PKers and you can all whine about how the mundanes keep getting targetted, which they weren't when nil was still an option.

Quote from: RogueGunslinger on March 14, 2016, 06:54:48 PM
Can we be real for a moment? Burglars, assassins, and pickpockets all do the same exact "practice till mastered before really playing their guild" strategy. It's not just a problem with magickers.

lots of truth in this.

Quote from: RogueGunslinger on March 14, 2016, 06:54:48 PM
Can we be real for a moment? Burglars, assassins, and pickpockets all do the same exact "practice till mastered before really playing their guild" strategy. It's not just a problem with magickers.

No, but it's the greatest with magickers. Burglars, assassins and pickets (or warriors or rangers) cannot sit in complete safety tpying in command after command to fully branch themselves and achieve coded usefulness. They have to go out in the world and put themselves at risk. If they choose to interact with people, so much the better.

Heck, even spam-crafting merchants have to risk runs to the bank and shop, or seek people out to learn recipes.

Quote from: Lizzie on March 14, 2016, 06:57:51 PM
You missed the part where I said I don't like PK AT ALL. I don't like that part of roleplay. I avoid it. I avoid PKing, because I don't like doing it. I've intentionally PKed maybe - 4 characters in over 10 years of playing. I didn't like doing any of them.

But if it was a choice between spam-casting on chalton just to get to the next power level, or practicing on other characters, and nil was no longer a choice, I'll practice on other characters and fuck my record of avoiding PK like the plague. I'll just join all the other PKers and you can all whine about how the mundanes keep getting targetted, which they weren't when nil was still an option.

Would you target players because you're bitter you're no longer possessing nil, or because targeting NPCs other than chalton (scrabs, tarantulas, twitchy men) would actually pose a danger to your PC?

Quote from: RogueGunslinger on March 14, 2016, 06:54:48 PM
Can we be real for a moment? Burglars, assassins, and pickpockets all do the same exact "practice till mastered before really playing their guild" strategy. It's not just a problem with magickers.

I do not, but I don't think I would with mages, either.

Really, this thread I think kind of derailed from where I wanted it to be, into more of a 'nerf mages' concept than what I thought it was, which was creative solutions to the magicker involvement problem without the whole 'just integrate them with everyone else already!'

If we can come up with an idea that gives gemmed mages something to do, as a rule, that is mostly separated but occasionally linking in with the mundaner (as opposed to magicker) plots, then we've hit money.

Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 14, 2016, 06:59:54 PM

Quote from: RogueGunslinger on March 14, 2016, 06:54:48 PM
Can we be real for a moment? Burglars, assassins, and pickpockets all do the same exact "practice till mastered before really playing their guild" strategy. It's not just a problem with magickers.

No, but it's the greatest with magickers. Burglars, assassins and pickets (or warriors or rangers) cannot sit in complete safety tpying in command after command to fully branch themselves and achieve coded usefulness. They have to go out in the world and put themselves at risk. If they choose to interact with people, so much the better.

Heck, even spam-crafting merchants have to risk runs to the bank and shop, or seek people out to learn recipes.

Quote from: Lizzie on March 14, 2016, 06:57:51 PM
You missed the part where I said I don't like PK AT ALL. I don't like that part of roleplay. I avoid it. I avoid PKing, because I don't like doing it. I've intentionally PKed maybe - 4 characters in over 10 years of playing. I didn't like doing any of them.

But if it was a choice between spam-casting on chalton just to get to the next power level, or practicing on other characters, and nil was no longer a choice, I'll practice on other characters and fuck my record of avoiding PK like the plague. I'll just join all the other PKers and you can all whine about how the mundanes keep getting targetted, which they weren't when nil was still an option.

Would you target players because you're bitter you're no longer possessing nil, or because targeting NPCs other than chalton (scrabs, tarantulas, twitchy men) would actually pose a danger to your PC?

If I have to risk my character's life just so that I can branch "cast silk underwear" from my first-tier "cast give-victim-a-booboo" then I'm gonna risk it on a PC, and try for some actual interaction.

Quote from: RogueGunslinger on March 14, 2016, 06:54:48 PM
Can we be real for a moment? Burglars, assassins, and pickpockets all do the same exact "practice till mastered before really playing their guild" strategy. It's not just a problem with magickers.

And those things won't be maxed or deadly in 5-10 days played, and would have put themselves in danger to get there. Burglars and pickpockets are good at one skill each. If mages took as long as mundanes to master I doubt we would even have people like Skeelz so resentful.

Also Lizzie is basically threatening to PK if this happened...which is actually crazy. Also those PCs would have a good fighting chance if she was casting on them rather than the current system where mon fireball or what have you can be reached with no risk. Lizzie would be causing interaction and taking risks with her PC, as well as causing conflict in the world. A net gain for the game.

This would also cause magick to be feared realistically rather than the kind of artificial fear we have going at the moment.

No, I'd still hate magick characters. But I wouldn't hate them for that.

Quote from: Inks on March 14, 2016, 07:17:06 PM

Quote from: RogueGunslinger on March 14, 2016, 06:54:48 PM
Can we be real for a moment? Burglars, assassins, and pickpockets all do the same exact "practice till mastered before really playing their guild" strategy. It's not just a problem with magickers.

And those things won't be maxed or deadly in 5-10 days played,

You are so, so, sooooooooooo wrong. Especially if you have 2 karma for 2 skill bumps.



Edit: To apologize for nitpicking this one point, I agree, that they would have to take risks to get there. I'm just saying that if we find a solution for magickers, maybe we should spread it around. I'm partial to fidning ways to make low level skills, if not useful, then at least fun or worth using in some manner.



Edit2: I bet if you added a hidden resistance to magick skill(if there isn't already one) then people would LOVE to cast un shit on themselves.

Badskeelz did a magician do bad things to you when you were a kid or what 8)

Just bore me.

My next magicker will definitely be a sit-in-the-temple-until-maxed one, because I have not had good results from going out for interaction and roleplaying characters before they became dangerous (or useful) with magick.

When players are eager to exercise their PK powers when given an excuse, "useless magicker" is not a good role to play.

Quote from: Lizzie on March 14, 2016, 07:14:38 PM

If I have to risk my character's life just so that I can branch "cast silk underwear" from my first-tier "cast give-victim-a-booboo" then I'm gonna risk it on a PC, and try for some actual interaction.

I'm pretty sure this lasts for 1-2 of awesome mage concepts getting slammed by even newish mundanes before you start figuring out ways to get powerful before messing with PCs.

I definitely wouldn't go pick a fight with some random person in the wastes with an unskilled mage. Just like I wouldn't attack them with a half day warrior to practice disarm. The idea of burning a concept on 'practicing spells' on PCs is pretty unpalatable to me. Plus, that supposes that your characters are sociopathic, suicidal, or a combination, and most mage characters -aren't- in fact evil overlords. I mean, some of my mage concepts were little better than warped near-humanoids chained to their element, but even they weren't running around looking for a PC to start casting on.

I really think changing nil, by all that's been said, is rife with unintended consequences. Limiting it to een or pav or something sounds like it could work, but then your just present yourself with: mages needing to cast spells at -high- power to gain and suddenly pav fireballs everywhere.

And I wouldn't be naive to think that players are going to be so restrictive of themselves to never cast a combat spell if they are a peaceful person. I mean - what if you have something you want down that magickal path that is fitting for your character? I think the majority of people are going to find a way to use it / practice it, just like they find creative ways to use other skills as mundanes to practice. I mean, it sounds -cool-. Oh, you're a peaceful mage? You don't know how to shoot a fireball. That's legit. But many players are going to use it, just like they will find stilt lizards / other ways to advance.

My mages for the most part do not use nil to train up. When I'm playing a mage, I try to cast things that make sense. Now - I definitely will try to find situations in which they are used, but using nil is not anathema ;).  I dislike sitting in a room and casting 'x nil dumbly dumb' me. It just feels like a labor, a twinkish one at that, and hard to explain ICly.  But I've only ever branched two mages, and only PK'd with one, so I'm not the levelling authority here. I tend to use nil in some situations as like, my mage 'holding back,' or summoning a force and then releasing it. I've had some cool emotes, thinks and feels from using the nil reach. There are some spells in which practicing quietly nil is just better. As in the previous mention, who wants to run into 50 instances of X magickal thing because some new witch needed practice?

Something of interest to me here would be comparing the vote results at this time(38 10 4 4 7)to post results.  Without checking, as I am too lazy to do it, I would suspect a vocal minority as I've observed in a few other threads.  But, that's just a guess.  Also the noise factor that might create.

P.S.  My vote is yes.  Because if you can't trust someone to use nil reach reasonably, why do they have mage karma?

Edit:  Here's a tally from the first page.  Not attributing who to what and so on, as it is not meant to be defamation.  Just a quick summary trying to be unbiased as could be.

Posts

Yes: 5

No: 3

Gemmed: 1

Branch it: 2

Redundant or off topic Posts:  9

My argument was going to be for taking nil away - but then Kryos blew my mind with the freedom to choose.
We should keep 'nil'.

I would agree that "nil" should give less experienced gained or something. Or maybe they should both be different skills perhaps. Nil and un. ... or maybe they are...?

Half jesting:

Nil should have a random chance of not-nilling.

"You accidentally blast yourself in the face!"
"You cast that high duration spell you can't remove.  *Nelson laugh*"

I think removing nil might be a solution, but only as part of their effort to redo the guild skill trees. If Mages lose nil then I believe they should certainly start with more than a handful of their spells available.

Quote from: lostinspace on March 15, 2016, 09:08:20 PM
I think removing nil might be a solution, but only as part of their effort to redo the guild skill trees. If Mages lose nil then I believe they should certainly start with more than a handful of their spells available.

This is a very interesting idea. Some magickers have very guild-defining spells they don't get until 1-2 levels down the branch tree. Starting with them for survivability and utility would be cool.

Quote from: Desertman on March 14, 2016, 11:49:44 AM
Removing nil will make it so that magickers have to go out "into the world" more often to "level their spells", if I understand it correctly.

It should in theory add more danger, and thus more meaning/more feelings of accomplishment to the player, to becoming a powerful magicker.

Again, as I pointed out, let's stop those house guards from sparring then, noone managed to address that since I posed it.  Force the house guards to go out there to fight for real, no sparring, I guarantee noone wants to sign up for that, or even the Byn, no practicing rescue in safety in the compound or any weapon training.

I addressed it.

I read somewhere in this thread that Is Friday has great fucking ideas.

Quote from: frankjacoby on March 16, 2016, 12:13:33 AM

Quote from: Desertman on March 14, 2016, 11:49:44 AM
Removing nil will make it so that magickers have to go out "into the world" more often to "level their spells", if I understand it correctly.

It should in theory add more danger, and thus more meaning/more feelings of accomplishment to the player, to becoming a powerful magicker.

Again, as I pointed out, let's stop those house guards from sparring then, noone managed to address that since I posed it.  Force the house guards to go out there to fight for real, no sparring, I guarantee noone wants to sign up for that, or even the Byn, no practicing rescue in safety in the compound or any weapon training.

Sparring is still very dangerous, characters die in training accidents all the time, but I've never heard of a mage in a temple dying while casting at nil. As it is now I don't want nil to be removed, I find it to be a very important tool for early game gicks, especially up until the point they branch their 'oh shit' spells and can leave the their lairs/temple safely. If nil is removed, I feel that something else will need to change. Above I recommended having the witches start without nil but with more spells immediately available, broadening and shortening their skill tree.

What if mages didn't learn nil, but instead when they mastered un learned a random reach, or a reach based on their class? I'm not even sure what they are, but I heard there are a few of them floating around out there.

One thing that might help is if the un reach started at novice skill level and allowed for learning "real" magick.

Quote from: lostinspace on March 16, 2016, 03:12:59 PM

Sparring is still very dangerous, characters die in training accidents all the time

This is something that shouldn't even be half as common as it is in the game.

Quote from: Jingo on March 16, 2016, 09:27:16 PM

Quote from: lostinspace on March 16, 2016, 03:12:59 PM

Sparring is still very dangerous, characters die in training accidents all the time

This is something that shouldn't even be half as common as it is in the game.

It's not common. It basically doesn't happen unless someone makes a dumb or OOC mistake: disconnections, mercy off, sparred with a half-giant, tried to train outside the sparring hall, etc. KOs happen fairly often, but deaths? No.

Saying magicker training should be dangerous because sparring is dangerous is ludicrous. Sparring is not "very dangerous."

I remember Silteye not being aware of his own strength and almost two hit KOing my unmanifested witch once during sparring. Luckily he didn't land the second hit. He did end up killing Metekillot though.

Nil reach is kind of stupid but I can't think of any bandage or solution. I did think of maybe adding an interesting for-show effect to some spells but that's like the casting echo effect, completely ignored by the player and the gameworld. If you're a rogue rukkian in an apartment in Storm, are you going to freak out when your first spell 'makes the ground shake' after paying 1000 for a game month of rent? No. No one's going to notice and knock on the door with guards. It also stifles creativity, what little creativity people are inspired to produce when they're sitting there casting.

What if nil reach had a 2% chance of having some form of coded penalty every time you cast?

What would the penalty be? A steep drop in one of the four stats? An inability to leave the coded room for a game hour? Both, at random?

I really dont get the hate for nil reach and I've read most of y'alls posts.

It's a way for magickers to train up skills.
It's the sparring weapons of magick.
I could see, maybe, having it have to have a valid target even though its nil.
IE:
Cast nill fireball, but have to cast it at someone.
So you still need a target...like a dummy or something, but you dont actually fireball the thing.

But just removing it is meh.

maybe nil can branch first and second tier spells, but no longer helps to branch higher tier magicks?

sounds like a cabbage plan to me.

Quote from: Jihelu on March 18, 2016, 09:47:14 PM
I really dont get the hate for nil reach and I've read most of y'alls posts.

It's a way for magickers to train up skills.
It's the sparring weapons of magick.

You can't max out a warrior from sparring for two weeks. The difference in progression between magick and mundane characters is so insanely vast that it's frankly silly. Mundane fighters improve so slowly that people are afraid to take risks because they're losing so much work if their character dies, and magickers improve so fast that it's more compelling to be reckless and trigger-happy as you can get back to where you were in a short enough time that it doesn't feel daunting.

It just feels intuitively wrong that it's mages who have that privilege while warriors have to be ultra-careful and meticulously plan their power growth so as to not get in trouble and lose it all. It fells kind of... completely backwards. Nil seems like the thing that causes this problem, at least on the magick side of the equation.

You could just make nil SUPER slow in learning spells and keep progression the same.
IE:
Lets say it takes two weeks, prob less, to level a magicker using nil.
Make it take 8-10-20-30-however high you want it to go.
But keep un the same

Quote from: The Silence of the Erdlus on March 17, 2016, 11:33:35 PM
What if nil reach had a 2% chance of having some form of coded penalty every time you cast?

What would the penalty be? A steep drop in one of the four stats? An inability to leave the coded room for a game hour? Both, at random?

I don't really think this is a good soloution.

The point of the ideas behind removing the nil reach is to stop them from being cooped up somewhere still, a mega stat loss or inability to leave the room kind of adds on to that. People use Nil to avoid having to wait to head out and Rp/adventure/ect.

Quote from: hyzhenhok on March 17, 2016, 02:38:08 AM

Quote from: Jingo on March 16, 2016, 09:27:16 PM

Quote from: lostinspace on March 16, 2016, 03:12:59 PM

Sparring is still very dangerous, characters die in training accidents all the time

This is something that shouldn't even be half as common as it is in the game.

It's not common. It basically doesn't happen unless someone makes a dumb or OOC mistake: disconnections, mercy off, sparred with a half-giant, tried to train outside the sparring hall, etc. KOs happen fairly often, but deaths? No.

Saying magicker training should be dangerous because sparring is dangerous is ludicrous. Sparring is not "very dangerous."

No it's not common. But it's common if the only person in you clan to spar is a 100 day warrior. And you aren't a 100 day warrior.

And then that 100 day warrior lags out after he bashes you.

It has happened to me. It's another broken system.

It's common enough to be a concern when you spar others.

I don't see a reason to push discussion on changing up nil reach when there's basically a 2 to 1 in favor of keeping it, against all other options.  Opinion of the unspoken seems clear.

Funnily enough, I misread the question and voted no.

On the subject of maxing magickers in two weeks, I have never done that, because I feel that it would be super twink spam casting mode to do it, but even if I had freedom to twink, that still doesn't make a magicker invincible.

I've been killed on well branched magickers with tons of days by random wildlife because most magickers don't train up combat.  So yes can a magicker kill you in one spell, sure.  But most times a Bynner can just bash them and cut them to death before they can cast a spell.

So they are totally glass cannons.  Removing Nil would make them need to go out and cast fireballs at critters and people over and over, which I don't think I'd like.  Is nil perfect? Nope but removing it would break the development of many magick guilds.

Quote from: Jingo on March 19, 2016, 03:14:23 PM

Quote from: hyzhenhok on March 17, 2016, 02:38:08 AM

Quote from: Jingo on March 16, 2016, 09:27:16 PM

Quote from: lostinspace on March 16, 2016, 03:12:59 PM

Sparring is still very dangerous, characters die in training accidents all the time

This is something that shouldn't even be half as common as it is in the game.

It's not common. It basically doesn't happen unless someone makes a dumb or OOC mistake: disconnections, mercy off, sparred with a half-giant, tried to train outside the sparring hall, etc. KOs happen fairly often, but deaths? No.

Saying magicker training should be dangerous because sparring is dangerous is ludicrous. Sparring is not "very dangerous."

No it's not common. But it's common if the only person in you clan to spar is a 100 day warrior. And you aren't a 100 day warrior.

And then that 100 day warrior lags out after he bashes you.

It has happened to me. It's another broken system.

Yes, I said the exception is lag and "dumb mistakes." A highly skilled, powerful warrior sparring a newb (without doing something like disarming himself), using bash, and forgetting to turn on mercy are three dumb mistakes piled on top of each other that still  are probably not going to be lethal until you throw in the lag.

I've played lots of sparring PCs, including with very powerful combat clanmates, and I've never seen an training hall death. The closest I've seen is when a runner who was left in the hall knocked out cold chased down the sergeant in the Gaj and attacked him, or that time we knocked a runner out and stuck him in latrines cesspool as a prank (oops!). I know these deaths do happen, and I'm sure they're very memorable thanks to the sheer incompetence and absurdity involved whenever they occur, but they are rare. Most combat characters will not even witness one in their lifetimes.

I played a long lived assassin that would frequently spar a long lived warrior. It was always a keystroke away from a reel-lock death.

Then there was my 60hp half-elf in the byn. People were afraid I was going to be one-shotted by a dwarf sparring partner.

It's common in certain circumstances.

If it's common only in rare, specific circumstances, it's not common.

Quote from: Jihelu on March 19, 2016, 11:31:41 AM
You could just make nil SUPER slow in learning spells and keep progression the same.

I like this. Partly because I like my grind.

Quote from: hyzhenhok on March 21, 2016, 04:05:53 AM
If it's common only in rare, specific circumstances, it's not common.

More common than mages blowing themselves up accidentally.

Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 21, 2016, 02:38:44 PM

Quote from: hyzhenhok on March 21, 2016, 04:05:53 AM
If it's common only in rare, specific circumstances, it's not common.

More common than mages blowing themselves up accidentally.

I should have been more direct in my previous post, I didn't mean to spawn this entire side argument. What Bad said is essentially what I was trying to say, magic training accidents are far fewer than sparring training accidents, because nil allows the magic user to be very safe and you don't have to worry about someone else remembering to turn mercy on. Does that mean nil should go? I don't think so, but I can certainly see why some people dislike it. Gemmed really do have very little to risk while they are safe in their temples, but I think the disadvantages of being a gick other places in the world make up for it.

Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 21, 2016, 02:38:44 PM

Quote from: hyzhenhok on March 21, 2016, 04:05:53 AM
If it's common only in rare, specific circumstances, it's not common.

More common than mages blowing themselves up accidentally.

I had a very long lived krathi once who was practicing a "F- everyone in a three block radius" spell without taking the proper precautions.... happened to notice about the time my prompt hit 3 HP.
Yeah, that happened.

I assume the new "touched" subguilds are now the Nil reach options, and the rest do not consist of Nil reach options?

I doubt it. That isn't how nil reach works. It just lets you cast a spell without the spell actually taking effect.

Considering how these are subguilds now and every gick will have the same mundane skills to level as anyone else, is there still a point to this thread?

No, but some people will always think Gicks are overpowered/ too common, so I am sure another will pop up soon.