Please discuss the most recent change (http://gdb.armageddon.org/index.php/topic,50864.msg934826.html#msg934826) here.
Pretty rad. I liked the thing because it was good.
I am down with it, it's sorta sorcerer changy. I approved of that, I approve of this.
Questions that immediately pop to mind:
Is Karma still a factor in these new elementalists?
If so, can you list them again, just for clarification. And if possible could you hyperlink the help files so I don't have to flub around looking for them.
I am excited. I dig this. I love this. This is the Golden Age of ArmageddonMud.
And here's a future Merchant/Magicker incoming.
Holy shit....
This just took a large step towards prompting me to create a new character.
Quote from: Asmoth on March 21, 2016, 04:28:34 PM
Questions that immediately pop to mind:
Is Karma still a factor in these new elementalists?
If so, can you list them again, just for clarification. And if possible could you hyperlink the help files so I don't have to flub around looking for them.
Quote from: The FAQ in the Update ThreadWhat are the new karma levels?
1 karma:
Water touched.
Stone touched.
2 karma:
Rukkian aspect of protection.
Rukkian aspect of creation.
Rukkian aspect of empowerment.
Vivaduan aspect of healing.
Vivaduan aspect of corruption.
Vivaduan aspect of creation.
3 karma:
Fire touched.
Wind touched.
4 karma:
Krathi aspect of guile.
Whiran aspect of tempest.
5 karma:
Krathi aspect of agony.
Whiran aspect of travel.
6 karma
Whiran aspect of illusion.
Krathi aspect of devastation.
Will staff be posting the help files for all the new subguilds shortly? Also when I check my karma options I still see that I have some magic guilds I can play, is this an oversight or are these changes not live yet?
Well I'm a little bummed my next PC won't be the nilazi I was planning :(
I'm not sure how I feel about it. I'm worried it'll inject a shitton more magick into the game in the interim though.
Quote from: Asmoth on March 21, 2016, 04:28:34 PM
Questions that immediately pop to mind:
Is Karma still a factor in these new elementalists?
If so, can you list them again, just for clarification. And if possible could you hyperlink the help files so I don't have to flub around looking for them.
Quote from: The FAQ in the OP
What are the new karma levels?
1 karma:
- Water touched.
- Stone touched.
2 karma:
- Rukkian aspect of protection.
- Rukkian aspect of creation.
- Rukkian aspect of empowerment.
- Vivaduan aspect of healing.
- Vivaduan aspect of corruption.
- Vivaduan aspect of creation.
3 karma:
- Fire touched.
- Wind touched.
4 karma:
- Krathi aspect of guile.
- Whiran aspect of tempest.
5 karma:
- Krathi aspect of agony.
- Whiran aspect of travel.
6 karma
- Whiran aspect of illusion.
- Krathi aspect of devastation.
Try: 'help ruk', 'help vivadu', 'help elementalist', 'help magick aspect'.
Quote from: lostinspace on March 21, 2016, 04:30:24 PM
Will staff be posting the help files for all the new subguilds shortly? Also when I check my karma options I still see that I have some magic guilds I can play, is this an oversight or are these changes not live yet?
http://armageddon.org/help/view/Rukkians
http://armageddon.org/help/view/Vivaduans
http://armageddon.org/help/view/Whirans
http://armageddon.org/help/view/Krathis
Quote from: lostinspace on March 21, 2016, 04:30:24 PM
Will staff be posting the help files for all the new subguilds shortly? Also when I check my karma options I still see that I have some magic guilds I can play, is this an oversight or are these changes not live yet?
Quote from: Update Notes-Upon logging in to the game, then back out again, accounts will be updated with options based on karma.
I absolute adore the "muddying" of what people with magickal abilities can do. LOVE. IT.
I'm curious to hear more about the removal and potential return of Nilazi spells. Will we see the return of such an explicitly anti-elementalist (sub)Guild some day?
Magia delenda est
As neat as this change is. It rocks, I'm excited.
Although, I'm totally not happy about the number of jedi warriors the game is going to have in the next few months.
There is not going to be any forced storing of old elementalists if they "live too long" is there?
I'd heard rumors in the past of elementalists getting too strong and stored.
Also, will there be any change to Gemmed? I mean, if he looks and acts like a ranger, he's gonna be harder to figure out unless he tells you he's a whatever.
I like the "people first, magickers second" mentality.
I'm a little skeptical about not being able to combine certain spells and elementalists becoming more "sorcerer-like" due to being split up into aspects. Often, the ability to combine certain spells is what made them most useful, and one or the other by themselves was not all that great.
At the same time, I'm concerned that this may make subguild elementalists more powerful than subguild sorcerers, due to mana regeneration.
I'm semi okay with drovians and nilazi being gone... semi because I really wanted to give each class a good run someday, now I never will!
Overall I'm very interested to see how this pans out.
Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 21, 2016, 04:34:16 PM
I'm curious to hear more about the removal and potential return of Nilazi spells. Will we see the return of such an explicitly anti-elementalist (sub)Guild some day?
Magia delenda est
We are looking to cycle in the spells from the drovian/elkrosian/nilazi trees into the game in compelling and thematically interesting ways.
Also, when I hear newbs and shit and players talking authoritatively about 'elemental touched' people, I'll be annoyed at how dumb that is
Quote from: Asmoth on March 21, 2016, 04:34:59 PM
There is not going to be any forced storing of old elementalists if they "live too long" is there?
I'd heard rumors in the past of elementalists getting too strong and stored.
Quote from: The FAQWill this change affect my current PC?
No. All changes introduced in this update are to new PCs only. Your current PC will not be changed in any way.
What happens to my current nilazi/drovian/elkrosian?
They will experience no change. They can go through their lives as normal until they die or you choose to store them.
Quote from: Asmoth on March 21, 2016, 04:34:59 PM
There is not going to be any forced storing of old elementalists if they "live too long" is there?
I'd heard rumors in the past of elementalists getting too strong and stored.
We will only retire PCs if they enter into a situation where they are no longer playable. The only instance where this might relate to "living too long" is if they get to such an old age that their stats are unplayable.
QuoteThe efforts of staff and players have hammered these elements into staples of the game world and, with some code adjustments, the spells associated with them will find their way back into play.
Can you elaborate on this? Will staple spells of the nuked elementalist guilds be readded to the spell lists of the new subguilds automatically, or will the acquisition be more.. reward based?Nvm, was sorta answered above.
Quote from: Case on March 21, 2016, 04:36:23 PM
Also, when I hear newbs and shit and players talking authoritatively about 'elemental touched' people, I'll be annoyed at how dumb that is
Murder those who consort with witches. They're stealing your health, your luck and your water.
Also, will there be any change to Gemmed? I mean, if he looks and acts like a ranger, he's gonna be harder to figure out unless he tells you he's a whatever.
Quote from: Asmoth on March 21, 2016, 04:38:28 PM
Also, will there be any change to Gemmed? I mean, if he looks and acts like a ranger, he's gonna be harder to figure out unless he tells you he's a whatever.
I'm not sure what you mean. If someone is able to hide their nature, that's an IC situation.
A bit bummed about the removal of my favorite 'gicker classes.
Unlike a Pure Sorcerer, though, I at least had the chance to play them.
This could potentially open the way to introduce different reaches into the playable sphere?
Under the old system, the ones I've witnessed in the "Bad Old Arm 2 Days" were far too powerful.
Under this system, though, I see it being possible.
Quote from: Asmoth on March 21, 2016, 04:38:28 PM
Also, will there be any change to Gemmed? I mean, if he looks and acts like a ranger, he's gonna be harder to figure out unless he tells you he's a whatever.
There have been elementalists, psionicists, merchants, and all the other dregs of society joining the Byn and acting like (terrible) warriors for many years. I don't see how that will change now!
Quote from: Rathustra on March 21, 2016, 04:39:28 PM
Quote from: Asmoth on March 21, 2016, 04:38:28 PM
Also, will there be any change to Gemmed? I mean, if he looks and acts like a ranger, he's gonna be harder to figure out unless he tells you he's a whatever.
I'm not sure what you mean. If someone is able to hide their nature, that's an IC situation.
Can I have my Bag of Magick-Detecting Baubles back?
Where did Ruk touch you?
A lot of interesting opportunities opening up with these mundane/magickal combinations. Time to think about magicker PCs in an entirely different way, concept-wise...
Sorry to see drovs, elkrosians and nilazi go, as far as guilds are concerned but curious about how the spells will be worked back in. Might turn into some solid advantages for the sorcerer subguilds, despite the over all reduction in spell numbers compared to full sorcs.
A little worried that elemental magick will feel less scary or at least less powerful, but these new subs will provide increased uncertainty about what magickers can do.. so maybe it'll balance out.
All in all though, a shake up was probably needed and I'm happy and appreciative of the effort put into this!
Edited to add: Interesting idea about reaches, Delirium. I think it'd be possible too.
Quote from: Rathustra on March 21, 2016, 04:39:28 PM
Quote from: Asmoth on March 21, 2016, 04:38:28 PM
Also, will there be any change to Gemmed? I mean, if he looks and acts like a ranger, he's gonna be harder to figure out unless he tells you he's a whatever.
I'm not sure what you mean. If someone is able to hide their nature, that's an IC situation.
Fair enough. Are we supposed to just act like this is how it's always been? Because this an ooc change? And what are the current mages considered in the realm of conversation? Since they are more than all the other groupings.
Can we re-open Tuluk so I can play a Templar and karate-chop these magickal scrubguilds with impunity?
Quote from: Rathustra on March 21, 2016, 04:32:24 PM
Quote from: lostinspace on March 21, 2016, 04:30:24 PM
Will staff be posting the help files for all the new subguilds shortly? Also when I check my karma options I still see that I have some magic guilds I can play, is this an oversight or are these changes not live yet?
http://armageddon.org/help/view/Rukkians
http://armageddon.org/help/view/Vivaduans
http://armageddon.org/help/view/Whirans
http://armageddon.org/help/view/Krathis
This doesn't go into what "touched" means... I'm curious. Cantrips? A handful of non-branching spells? Gimme details!
(So... where on the dolly did the element touch you?)
Quote from: Asmoth on March 21, 2016, 04:42:47 PM
Quote from: Rathustra on March 21, 2016, 04:39:28 PM
Quote from: Asmoth on March 21, 2016, 04:38:28 PM
Also, will there be any change to Gemmed? I mean, if he looks and acts like a ranger, he's gonna be harder to figure out unless he tells you he's a whatever.
I'm not sure what you mean. If someone is able to hide their nature, that's an IC situation.
Fair enough. Are we supposed to just act like this is how it's always been? Because this an ooc change? And what are the current mages considered in the realm of conversation? Since they are more than all the other groupings.
I still think I'm not sure 100% what you're asking. But I think you're asking whether PCs should notice that magickers are suddenly able to do stuff (mundane stuff) that magickers couldn't do before. In that situation I'd advise 'acting like it's always been that way' - because the magicker guild's inability to fight was a coded limitation - there was no reason, using game-wold logic, why a magicker was crap at mundane tasks.
So when you find out Amos the Bynner who was super good at rough circle is a gemmer, you shouldn't be surprised - because gickers can be anyone. Not just the weaklings.
Using the mage-loving lobe of my brain, I'm a little sad. Using the power-gaming bits, I'm slightly terrified as to what'll be possible with a mundane main and a focused elemental sub.
Quote from: Delirium on March 21, 2016, 04:46:10 PM
Quote from: Rathustra on March 21, 2016, 04:32:24 PM
Quote from: lostinspace on March 21, 2016, 04:30:24 PM
Will staff be posting the help files for all the new subguilds shortly? Also when I check my karma options I still see that I have some magic guilds I can play, is this an oversight or are these changes not live yet?
http://armageddon.org/help/view/Rukkians
http://armageddon.org/help/view/Vivaduans
http://armageddon.org/help/view/Whirans
http://armageddon.org/help/view/Krathis
This doesn't go into what "touched" means... I'm curious. Cantrips? A handful of non-branching spells? Gimme details!
(So... where on the dolly did the element touch you?)
A new helpfile on the topic might be in order. Otherwise I can only offer what's in the FAQ:
QuoteWhat are the 'touched' subguilds?
The touched subguilds are a new variety of elementalist (though this distinction is currently entirely OOC) that experience their elemental connection in a less explicit way. Possessing a mixture of magickal power and mundane prowess imparted through cantrips, these elementalists offer a new way to build a magicker PC.
Rathustra's personal picks: Whiran tempest, vivaduan corruptor, krathi beguiler. Not in that order.
I've logged out and in a few times, I am still seeing the main guilds on my options list that I get when I press 'o' on the login menu. Is this meant to mean I have access to all of the parts of that guild? Also incredibly sad I missed my chance at playing a Nilazi and a Drovian, I was saving the funnest sounding for last :(.
Can you please post rough rates of magickal expression among the population so it stops being treated as a common thing thematically?
I like it! Kinda. I mean, I do like it, but I am not sure whether to feel bad for current drovs/elkros/nilazi or to be very jealous of them.
Quote from: Case on March 21, 2016, 04:50:11 PM
Can you please post rough rates of magickal expression among the population so it stops being treated as a common thing thematically?
I can try and add more references to the rarity of magickal expression, but solid numbers always end up being millstones around our necks. Let me see what I can do.
Hah, yeah. I wonder how many people with pure 'gickers are currently going, welp....I have the PC I'm going to keep for the rest of my life.
Quote from: Case on March 21, 2016, 04:50:11 PM
Can you please post rough rates of magickal expression among the population so it stops being treated as a common thing thematically?
Probably not the right topic to post that question in, this is about the goodness of this change. No more glass cannons, now they are tanks, that fire MAGICK.
Quote from: th3kaiser on March 21, 2016, 04:51:57 PM
Hah, yeah. I wonder how many people with pure 'gickers are currently going, welp....I have the PC I'm going to keep for the rest of my life.
o/
Quote from: Delirium on March 21, 2016, 04:46:10 PM
Quote from: Rathustra on March 21, 2016, 04:32:24 PM
Quote from: lostinspace on March 21, 2016, 04:30:24 PM
Will staff be posting the help files for all the new subguilds shortly? Also when I check my karma options I still see that I have some magic guilds I can play, is this an oversight or are these changes not live yet?
http://armageddon.org/help/view/Rukkians
http://armageddon.org/help/view/Vivaduans
http://armageddon.org/help/view/Whirans
http://armageddon.org/help/view/Krathis
This doesn't go into what "touched" means... I'm curious. Cantrips? A handful of non-branching spells? Gimme details!
(So... where on the dolly did the element touch you?)
Also these might help glean some hints:
http://armageddon.org/help/view/Elementalist
http://armageddon.org/help/view/cantrip
I like it.
This new system seems to fit so much better with the lore and theme of the gameworld in my opinion.
Quote from: th3kaiser on March 21, 2016, 04:51:57 PM
Hah, yeah. I wonder how many people with pure 'gickers are currently going, welp....I have the PC I'm going to keep for the rest of my life.
Nah, I know I'm personally wondering how I'm going to resist making a ranger/magicker at the earliest availability.
Quote from: Desertman on March 21, 2016, 04:53:28 PM
I like it.
This new system seems to fit so much better with the lore and theme of the gameworld in my opinion.
Yes sir, plus it makes more sense for characters who manifest later in life.
Old system:
I was a warrior in the byn, then all the sudden rainbows shot out of my ass and I sucked at fighting, but all the sudden could make rainbows!
New System:
Yeah I kicked your ass for years in the Byn, now I can shoot fire from the hand not holding my weapon, come at me bitch.
Quote from: Asmoth on March 21, 2016, 04:52:13 PM
Quote from: Case on March 21, 2016, 04:50:11 PM
Can you please post rough rates of magickal expression among the population so it stops being treated as a common thing thematically?
Probably not the right topic to post that question in, this is about the goodness of this change. No more glass cannons, now they are tanks, that fire MAGICK.
It is on topic because there's probably going to be a lot more magickal characters in the game soon. The rest of us need to know just how common magick is supposed to be so we can RP against it.
Shit I might even play a magicker at some point now.
Hidden and secret of course while living out my normal mundane life in a realistic manner with extreme fear about ever being found out...but still...this is much more interesting for me personally.
Will the elementalists aspects get all their magickal abilities up front or will they have the potential to branch new magickal abilities related to their aspect?
Quote from: Molten Heart on March 21, 2016, 04:58:29 PM
Will the elementalists aspects get all their magickal abilities up front or will they have the potential to branch new magickal abilities related to their aspect?
This is a great question, one of the pains in the ass about magickers is the casting one spell five hundred times to eventually branch the next.
If they all come out initially and just allow you to develop the ones that matter, I think I'll bust in my pants right now and suicide my character. (Not really, but be super excited)
I do hope that the overlap between the subguild varieties is substantial enough that not too many dumb "tests" emerge, like when an employer would demand a potential hire speak Cavalish back in the old day in order to prove he/she was really a crafter.
"Oh. You say you're a Vivaduan, but ... you can't heal this scratch? Really? Huh. Well, we don't like the corruption variety. Guards, off with his head!"
Y-you...you don't understand.
You don't understand.
Staff made a change to magick that...that I....I actually like.
What is this feeling inside of me.
What is this.
This dark feeling.
I-I need to lay down.
Nilazi aren't things anymore and I like that.
All the stupid magic is gone.
We can finally have a world filled with magick that isn't stupid.
I
I don't.
What is this
+1 to whoever wanted this
WAT
The elementalist subguilds are similar to extended subguilds. So while you may start with several abilities, you develop others through play. Though this development is much shorter than with full guilds.
The overlap varies within and between elements. If people encounter such tests, let us know so we can remind PCs in positions of authority that our code is a framework upon which the virtual world is draped, not the full extent of it!
Does this mean only magickers who are Merchants will be able to mastercraft now?
I'm curious what the "Touched" version of these are.
I'm reading it to say, "You are touched by the element, you can't actually summon -real- spells that do things, but you can do some minor magical things that have no material affect.".
Which is fine and interesting, I just want to make sure I'm reading that right.
Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 21, 2016, 05:04:36 PM
Does this mean only magickers who are Merchants will be able to mastercraft now?
This is effectively the situation.
Well shit.
Quote from: Desertman on March 21, 2016, 05:04:56 PM
I'm curious what the "Touched" version of these are.
I'm reading it to say, "You are touched by the element, you can't actually summon -real- spells that do things, but you can do some minor magical things that have no material affect.".
I am reading it for people who purely want to have the power of fluff elementalism. IE: The air gets damp as tressy tressy walks in.
Versus, Tressy Tressy casts suck you dry of water and you die.
So if you're currently playing a full elementalist, does this mean that your PC is now some sort of magickal savant?
Quote from: Desertman on March 21, 2016, 05:04:56 PM
I'm curious what the "Touched" version of these are.
I'm reading it to say, "You are touched by the element, you can't actually summon -real- spells that do things, but you can do some minor magical things that have no material affect.".
Touched subguilds possess a blend of magickal abilities from their elemental connection and more subtle abilities granted by their attunement to their element.
Quote from: Beethoven on March 21, 2016, 05:07:42 PM
So if you're currently playing a full elementalist, does this mean that your PC is now some sort of magickal savant?
Uh
yes
Quote from: Beethoven on March 21, 2016, 05:07:42 PM
So if you're currently playing a full elementalist, does this mean that your PC is now some sort of magickal savant?
OOCly? Sort of. ICly? Your character can only make this assessment when they encounter something to suggest it. They will feel no IC change after this update!
Quote from: Desertman on March 21, 2016, 05:04:56 PM
I'm curious what the "Touched" version of these are.
I'm reading it to say, "You are touched by the element, you can't actually summon -real- spells that do things, but you can do some minor magical things that have no material affect.".
Which is fine and interesting, I just want to make sure I'm reading that right.
Same here, This definetly seems like it'll be interesting flavor roles to play, I mean, since theyre comparable to possible extended subguilds, i imagine they'll have some things - its even stated it means possible mundane things or cantrips, which is quite exciting!
This is going to add a whole new level of varitiy to magical characters - and in a way, that mangifies the mystery of it.
For tribes with magicker roles, will the current caps be extended now that their future magickers won't be as versatile for communing with the chosen element?
Quote from: Beethoven on March 21, 2016, 05:07:42 PM
So if you're currently playing a full elementalist, does this mean that your PC is now some sort of magickal savant?
You will still be the glass cannon, super capable of all these abilities, but killable by a one week old bynner if they get the drop on you. Heh.
I'm curious as to if this will actually be an ic event or change.
Such as
"Magick is leaving the world in tiny bits but not really"
Or if it's just a completely pure OOC change of "People might notice IC eh, probably not"
I feel like theres some fancy plot potential there if its the actual ic thing, but the minute someone confirms it everyone and their mother would notice.
Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 21, 2016, 05:09:53 PM
For tribes with magicker roles, will the current caps be extended now that their future magickers won't be as versatile for communing with the chosen element?
Caps on magickers will not change for clans that permit them.
Quote from: Rathustra on March 21, 2016, 05:12:04 PM
Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 21, 2016, 05:09:53 PM
For tribes with magicker roles, will the current caps be extended now that their future magickers won't be as versatile for communing with the chosen element?
Caps on magickers will not change for clans that permit them.
Will Touched (assuming they're not as pewpewkaboom as old Magick guilds or some of the new Subguilds) count against those caps?
Quote from: Jihelu on March 21, 2016, 05:11:50 PM
I'm curious as to if this will actually be an ic event or change.
Such as
"Magick is leaving the world in tiny bits but not really"
Or if it's just a completely pure OOC change of "People might notice IC eh, probably not"
I feel like theres some fancy plot potential there if its the actual ic thing, but the minute someone confirms it everyone and their mother would notice.
Consider a real-world scenario where a teacup is observed orbiting pluto in the readout from a fly-by satellite. It's down to the people on earth to react to this phenomena in a way that makes sense for them and they can deliberate and experiment as much as they want from their remote location. The chances of anyone ever coming to a proper conclusion, however, is remote.
To be less obnoxious - this change will be experienced IC. But we hope/expect players to have their PCs react and explore it in an IC way that makes sense for their PC. If you tell Vennant "hey barkeep I heard magickers are different now" he'll either not care, not believe you or throw you out. Similarly, consider that OOC knowledge of "guilds" and "spell trees" are only know IC as far as people (who lack the scientific method, are unreliable actors and are steeped in superstition) can experience them. The signal to noise ratio on what magickers could ever do, or what magick is should be such that for the vast, vast majority of people - it doesn't matter.
Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 21, 2016, 05:14:43 PM
Quote from: Rathustra on March 21, 2016, 05:12:04 PM
Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 21, 2016, 05:09:53 PM
For tribes with magicker roles, will the current caps be extended now that their future magickers won't be as versatile for communing with the chosen element?
Caps on magickers will not change for clans that permit them.
Will Touched (assuming they're not as pewpewkaboom as old Magick guilds or some of the new Subguilds) count against those caps?
May need to consider this. We'll see.
Speaking of caps...
I vaguely recall staff saying they monitor the number of magickers in the game. Will this still stand? I'm not overly intrigued by the prospect of running into dozens of magickally gifted PCs trying out the new digs.
Edit: Thread moves too fast for my phone skills.
Quote from: TheWanderer on March 21, 2016, 05:17:16 PM
Speaking of caps...
I vaguely recall staff saying they monitor the number of magickers in the game. Will this still stand? I'm not overly intrigued by the prospect of running into dozens of magickally gifted PCs trying out the new digs.
This will remain the case. We will put breaks on magickers if it gets stupid. Such breaks will be temporary and we will try to focus on people playing multiple magickers in a row to give as many people as possible chances to try new stuff.
This is truly exciting! Super kudos to all involved!
The mix and match possibilities are making my mind race with future character concepts!
*applause
I will miss nilazi.
You creepy mother fuckers.
Quote from: Jihelu on March 21, 2016, 05:20:20 PM
I will miss nilazi.
You creepy mother fuckers.
Would make for an interesting addition to the Sorcerer Subguilds if the staff incorporate in the 3 lost main guilds.
That sounds scarier imho.
Since Sorcerers were changed to not have "all of the access", can a Sorcerer now in theory pick their "Sorcerer Stuff", but then bolster it as well by making them in addition a Elementalist subguild?
Quote from: Desertman on March 21, 2016, 05:22:53 PM
Since Sorcerers were changed to not have "all of the access", can a Sorcerer now in theory pick their "Sorcerer Stuff", but then bolster it as well by making them in addition a Elementalist subguild?
You cannot combine a karma guild and a karma subguild.
Quote from: shadeoux on March 21, 2016, 05:22:14 PM
Quote from: Jihelu on March 21, 2016, 05:20:20 PM
I will miss nilazi.
You creepy mother fuckers.
Would make for an interesting addition to the Sorcerer Subguilds if the staff incorporate in the 3 lost main guilds.
That sounds scarier imho.
Nilaz seems like good candidate for a potential path for a defiler sorcerer.
Sorta related to the code changes.
Is Karma review and guidelines for who has it, going to be changed at all?
Reason I ask, and I can't believe I'm saying this as a 1-karma player, but shouldn't it be harder to get now because before you had to grind a mage to dangerous status if you wanted to really do some shady or griefer type shit.
Now you can slow boil a ranger, who's deadly on his own, into a poison wielding, fire magick destructive force in a much EASIER incline.
Seems like that would require MORE trust than a simple mage that a bynner with a week of training could murder.
*Grumble grumble* TOO MUCH CHANGE. >:(
Seriously, though...
Love elementalist subguilds.
Dislike the loss of elementalist main-guilds, but I'm willing to see how things pan out before calling for their return.
Hate the loss of 3 whole elements. Contrived or not, they've been a part of the game for an extremely long time. Would like to see them woven back in as an identity, even if they never actually get a full 4 sub-guilds each.
Quote from: Rathustra on March 21, 2016, 05:05:58 PM
Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 21, 2016, 05:04:36 PM
Does this mean only magickers who are Merchants will be able to mastercraft now?
This is effectively the situation.
Addendum: This is effectively the situation right now.
Remember, this is just the first of many phases in our guild revamp.
Quote from: Asmoth on March 21, 2016, 05:28:04 PM
Sorta related to the code changes.
Is Karma review and guidelines for who has it, going to be changed at all?
Reason I ask, and I can't believe I'm saying this as a 1-karma player, but shouldn't it be harder to get now because before you had to grind a mage to dangerous status if you wanted to really do some shady or griefer type shit.
Now you can slow boil a ranger, who's deadly on his own, into a poison wielding, fire magick destructive force in a much EASIER incline.
Seems like that would require MORE trust than a simple mage that a bynner with a week of training could murder.
We aren't going to tighten up the karma awarding system. But we will certainly be clear-cut with removing options from players who demonstrate an ability to use the subguilds to bring something to the game world.
Love the update and very much looking forward to reading the help files again...and maybe again and again.
Great work, my thanks to all involved for continuous efforts!
Is the staff side of the world going to be affected by this?
IE: Say staff had a plot idea for nilazi take over or some shit.
No more making nilazi to rush the city?
Quote from: Jihelu on March 21, 2016, 05:35:32 PM
Is the staff side of the world going to be affected by this?
IE: Say staff had a plot idea for nilazi take over or some shit.
No more making nilazi to rush the city?
I'm sure it's gonna be like Full Sorcerers, if they want to play one for a plot, they will.
We as players just won't see them in their old form.
;.;
Rip nilazi
Good night sweet prince
I'll see you when you resurrect your self from the hells and what not.
So whens the psionicist buff. I want them to be more scary.
I deeply dislike removing entire elements from play.
I like magical subguilds. But I also deeply dislike removing full-guild elementalists as an option.
This greatly diminishes my desire to play, since I was always aiming towards getting enough karma to play a powerful magic class.
The funny thing is the GUILD SNIFF, will now turn to the SUBGUILD SNIFF.
Employer: Yeah, you can skin stuff, ride well and shoot a bow, I get you're a good hunter.. But what do you do for fun?
Character: Pardon?
Employer: You know, Joe over there makes armor. Stephanie makes weapons. Curtis makes those tablets and such. What do you do?
Character: I don't really have any interesting talents like that.
Employer: LIAR! Get out of my face!
god dammit rath why you do you do this when i have no time to properly sit down and think about the ramifications and potential
I dig everything about this
god dammit i dig it so hard
omfg i dig it
Quote from: Asmoth on March 21, 2016, 05:43:32 PM
The funny thing is the GUILD SNIFF, will now turn to the SUBGUILD SNIFF.
Employer: Yeah, you can skin stuff, ride well and shoot a bow, I get you're a good hunter.. But what do you do for fun?
Character: Pardon?
Employer: You know, Joe over there makes armor. Stephanie makes weapons. Curtis makes those tablets and such. What do you do?
Character: I don't really have any interesting talents like that.
Employer: LIAR! Get out of my face!
That categorically shouldn't get happening at all, it's shit play
Obviously I don't have the full picture yet because I haven't played any of these sub guilds and the rest of the guild changes haven't occurred yet. I'm glad that the game is seeing changes and updates, even if I personally dislike this one.
Is the Tor battle-mage still a thing?
I fully love these changes.
It's turning the being a rogue into a more doable role without total isolation.
You can sneak off after your real job, or when your buddies around around to practice your hidden witchcraft.
This sorta goes to another post I was talking in. It removes a bit of the glass ceiling to certain roles.
Totally love it. Embrace it people, it makes more sense in the long run.
Quote from: Wasteland Wanderer on March 21, 2016, 05:54:01 PM
Is the Tor battle-mage still a thing?
If anything a warrior, subguild devastation krathi, it is more of a REAL thing.
I'm very...skeptical. Not unhappy, just very unsure that this is actually a good thing. Time will tell.
Quote from: Armaddict on March 21, 2016, 05:58:28 PM
I'm very...skeptical. Not unhappy, just very unsure that this is actually a good thing. Time will tell.
The more posts I see like this,
Quote from: Asmoth on March 21, 2016, 05:56:40 PM
I fully love these changes.
It's turning the being a rogue into a more doable role without total isolation.
You can sneak off after your real job, or when your buddies around around to practice your hidden witchcraft.
This sorta goes to another post I was talking in. It removes a bit of the glass ceiling to certain roles.
Totally love it. Embrace it people, it makes more sense in the long run.
Quote from: Wasteland Wanderer on March 21, 2016, 05:54:01 PM
Is the Tor battle-mage still a thing?
If anything a warrior, subguild devastation krathi, it is more of a REAL thing.
the more skeptical of this change I am.
I feel like this basically kills the gemmed role. Not that I overly mind, I just can't see how it'll work anymore. Magickers are now gonna be warriors and rangers and stuff, with a handful of spells. Who in their right mind is going to accept the gemmed role with such a character? It used to be that you got to play an incredibly powerful mage in exchange for extreme limitations on clans and places you could go. It feels like magickers are being turned into the equivalent of paladins and spellswords and such, which feels completely at odds with the gemmed concept.
Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 21, 2016, 06:10:23 PM
Quote from: Armaddict on March 21, 2016, 05:58:28 PM
I'm very...skeptical. Not unhappy, just very unsure that this is actually a good thing. Time will tell.
The more posts I see like this,
Quote from: Asmoth on March 21, 2016, 05:56:40 PM
I fully love these changes.
It's turning the being a rogue into a more doable role without total isolation.
You can sneak off after your real job, or when your buddies around around to practice your hidden witchcraft.
This sorta goes to another post I was talking in. It removes a bit of the glass ceiling to certain roles.
Totally love it. Embrace it people, it makes more sense in the long run.
Quote from: Wasteland Wanderer on March 21, 2016, 05:54:01 PM
Is the Tor battle-mage still a thing?
If anything a warrior, subguild devastation krathi, it is more of a REAL thing.
the more skeptical of this change I am.
Add in different reaches, I hope they add in more reaches. Then the above will be -really- nasty.
Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 21, 2016, 06:10:23 PM
Quote from: Armaddict on March 21, 2016, 05:58:28 PM
I'm very...skeptical. Not unhappy, just very unsure that this is actually a good thing. Time will tell.
The more posts I see like this,
the more skeptical of this change I am.
They got you...
Quote from: Rathustra on March 21, 2016, 05:31:42 PM
We aren't going to tighten up the karma awarding system. But we will certainly be clear-cut with removing options from players who demonstrate an ability to use the subguilds to bring something to the game world.
Quote from: Warsong on March 21, 2016, 06:14:19 PM
I feel like this basically kills the gemmed role. Not that I overly mind, I just can't see how it'll work anymore. Magickers are now gonna be warriors and rangers and stuff, with a handful of spells. Who in their right mind is going to accept the gemmed role with such a character? It used to be that you got to play an incredibly powerful mage in exchange for extreme limitations on clans and places you could go. It feels like magickers are being turned into paladins and shadowblades and such, which feels completely at odds with the gemmed concept.
People who don't want to be hunted down and beheaded by the Templarate will choose the Gem.
Just because the spell lists have changed does not mean IC attitudes have changed. The Gem is a means of control first and foremost; its secondary purpose is to provide the Templarate with artillery, spies, and medics.
The Gemmed role is not so people can play at being Harry Potter with full access to spells. It exists so people can play freakish and potentially powerful slaves.
People who submit concepts or attempt to play magickers as paladins and such will be denied as they would have been if they'd tried to play old vivaduans as clerics.
Also being gemmed is only a choice for PCs starting gemmed. While this change might perhaps see a reduction in PCs entering the game pre-gemmed, I hope it empowers PCs to be more ruthless with those who try to evade the gem.
http://armageddon.org/help/view/Gemmed
Quote from: Case on March 21, 2016, 05:48:36 PM
Quote from: Asmoth on March 21, 2016, 05:43:32 PM
The funny thing is the GUILD SNIFF, will now turn to the SUBGUILD SNIFF.
Employer: Yeah, you can skin stuff, ride well and shoot a bow, I get you're a good hunter.. But what do you do for fun?
Character: Pardon?
Employer: You know, Joe over there makes armor. Stephanie makes weapons. Curtis makes those tablets and such. What do you do?
Character: I don't really have any interesting talents like that.
Employer: LIAR! Get out of my face!
That categorically shouldn't get happening at all, it's shit play
Shouldn't, but does. Same with oldschool guild sniffing. I think I'll just start reporting these people to staff, even when it doesn't matter for me personally.
Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 21, 2016, 06:17:08 PM
Quote from: Warsong on March 21, 2016, 06:14:19 PM
I feel like this basically kills the gemmed role. Not that I overly mind, I just can't see how it'll work anymore. Magickers are now gonna be warriors and rangers and stuff, with a handful of spells. Who in their right mind is going to accept the gemmed role with such a character? It used to be that you got to play an incredibly powerful mage in exchange for extreme limitations on clans and places you could go. It feels like magickers are being turned into paladins and shadowblades and such, which feels completely at odds with the gemmed concept.
People who don't want to be hunted down and beheaded by the Templarate will choose the Gem.
Just because the spell lists have changed does not mean IC attitudes have changed. The Gem is a means of control first and foremost; its secondary purpose is to provide the Templarate with artillery, spies, and medics.
That seems like an extremely unappealing character, being an unclanned warrior/ranger/merchant/whatever with (presumably) a small selection of spells, and gigantic social stigma. Having the full spell suite was what made up for that in the past. Now? I'll take the already more interesting concept of being a rogue magicker in a clan, since the ability to sit in a temple and cast all day must surely be of far less significance now.
Sure, you can do that. But don't think your clan will be any more understanding. If you decide to manifest they'll probably turn you over to the Templarate, dead or alive.
Personally I would much rather have played a touched Warrior than a Magicker/Extended Subguild on my Gemmed. The Magick guilds were garbage.
I didn't like the sorcerer changes, I'm not too excited about this change either. I liked playing a whiran because of the combination of things is offered, not because of 1/4 of the things it offered. I definitely have no interest in playing a quarter-mage. What's worse, is there are some players (you know there are, and you know who you are) who will use their OOC knowledge in game, even if they insist they never do it. With these new quarter-mages, you can tell when they cast their very first spell which of the other 3/4s they do NOT possess. Any merchant/illusionist is going to be "outed" by "those players" as someone who can be easily killed. With a whiran, you never knew which of their spells they had, but you knew that they had the potential to be horrendously deadly. Or tremendously stealthy. Or ridiculously spooky. Or be remarkably useful with their utility spells. Now - you will know if they don't have that potential as soon as you see the first spell they cast.
As it stands currently, before the rest of the changes are made, I don't like this at all. But I'll keep an open mind for when the rest of the changes are made. I kept an open mind when the sorcerer changes were made and however many years later, I still don't like them and I'm not likely to ever waste a special app on a sorcerer subguild.
Quote from: Warsong on March 21, 2016, 06:20:31 PM
..
since the ability to sit in a temple and cast all day must surely be of far less significance now.
Again, I'm not the roleplay police, but this has always appeared to me as people doing it wrong.
That's not to say you can't go there to cast a bit here and there, or go there to roleplay with your counterparts.
But if I log in and see you in the temple for hours on end, just resting/sleeping, spamcasting. I'm going to probably oocly ask you if you're playing the character or the mage first. And if you don't respond, submit a player complaint.
Being gemmed so you can spamcast in the temple, isn't a benefit.
Now course there are exceptions to the rule but the temples at least in my opinion, aren't temples of solitude to go train in till you're a magickal superman, they are places to gather with your peers, hang out when nobody else is around to deal with (IDLE) and or store a few things that you don't mind getting stolen.
Just my take on it.
I can see some definite potential for gemmed roles. They would be hardmode - not impossible though.
Hardmode is ok, I had a few future concepts nixed but I think with a few twists they'll actually be MORE interesting now.
I am definitely worried about subguild sniffing, but ruthless and shameless player complaints may at least somewhat fix the problem.
I'd have liked this change a lot more if full elementalists were kept in, maybe at a higher karma cost.
Maybe I want to play a gemmed who is fully devoted to spellcasting. In fact I have always wanted to play this role. Now I cannot, and I never will be able to. This change adds player choice but it also removes player choice.
I guess this answers the question of whether I made the right choice to not store my current char so as to roll up an Elkran...
...it was wrong. I made the wrong choice. :'(
I think this is probably going to be a good change, but I feel like I'm gonna need a while to get over what was lost before I feel good about what was gained.
Quote from: Lizzie on March 21, 2016, 06:24:08 PM
I didn't like the sorcerer changes, I'm not too excited about this change either. I liked playing a whiran because of the combination of things is offered, not because of 1/4 of the things it offered. I definitely have no interest in playing a quarter-mage. What's worse, is there are some players (you know there are, and you know who you are) who will use their OOC knowledge in game, even if they insist they never do it. With these new quarter-mages, you can tell when they cast their very first spell which of the other 3/4s they do NOT possess. Any merchant/illusionist is going to be "outed" by "those players" as someone who can be easily killed. With a whiran, you never knew which of their spells they had, but you knew that they had the potential to be horrendously deadly. Or tremendously stealthy. Or ridiculously spooky. Or be remarkably useful with their utility spells. Now - you will know if they don't have that potential as soon as you see the first spell they cast.
As it stands currently, before the rest of the changes are made, I don't like this at all. But I'll keep an open mind for when the rest of the changes are made. I kept an open mind when the sorcerer changes were made and however many years later, I still don't like them and I'm not likely to ever waste a special app on a sorcerer subguild.
1/3rd, third mages. The touched subguilds exist outside of the one-to-three split. I'd argue that knowing someone was a mage of a particular element gave you all the knowledge you needed to deal with them. Considering what was branched was certainly a source of uncertainty, but could be overcome by using further OOC knowledge to gauge how likely any given spell was of being available.
Splitting it three ways, given that these splits have overlapping spells, means that the situation is changed - perhaps not perfectly - but the 'sniffing' algorithm is different and has increased uncertainty in some areas.
At the end of the day though, if you fear what ill-willed players are going to do, you will always be on your back foot.
Maybe the "subguild sniff" problem could be fixed if we were allowed to pick one extra skill - any skill - that you can get to journeyman.
That would definitely help throw people off.
Rath - it's less about players knowing what you're capable of, and players using OOC knowledge to know that you're "most likely" a subguild abomination.
At least, it is for me, anyway. The more I think about it, the more I'm concerned this'll be a problem.
Quote from: Delirium on March 21, 2016, 06:29:30 PM
Rath - it's less about players knowing what you're capable of, and players using OOC knowledge to know that you're "most likely" a subguild abomination.
Hopefully we can solve this with our next few phases of guild updates.
Quote from: Delirium on March 21, 2016, 06:28:30 PM
Maybe the "subguild sniff" problem could be fixed if we were allowed to pick one extra skill - any skill - that you can get to journeyman.
That would definitely help throw people off.
This chick is a genius, if there was one random tradeskill tossed in the mix of my ranger/quarter-whiran, then I wouldn't be able to be outted so easy.
I'm just a spearmaker in my part time... Who seems to vanish whenever you need me. Mwhaahahaha.
Quote from: Asmoth on March 21, 2016, 06:25:09 PM
Quote from: Warsong on March 21, 2016, 06:20:31 PM
..
since the ability to sit in a temple and cast all day must surely be of far less significance now.
Again, I'm not the roleplay police, but this has always appeared to me as people doing it wrong.
That's not to say you can't go there to cast a bit here and there, or go there to roleplay with your counterparts.
But if I log in and see you in the temple for hours on end, just resting/sleeping, spamcasting. I'm going to probably oocly ask you if you're playing the character or the mage first. And if you don't respond, submit a player complaint.
Being gemmed so you can spamcast in the temple, isn't a benefit.
Now course there are exceptions to the rule but the temples at least in my opinion, aren't temples of solitude to go train in till you're a magickal superman, they are places to gather with your peers, hang out when nobody else is around to deal with (IDLE) and or store a few things that you don't mind getting stolen.
Just my take on it.
Doesn't matter what the view from your soapbox is. The fact remains that this was the main appeal of the gemmed role, and something many of them did, and it doesn't sound like it'll be of any real value after this change. While I'll lose absolutely no sleep over seeing less gemmed around, we do have an entire quarter of Allanak devoted to them and it'll be kinda weird if that ends up being empty while every clan is suddenly scrambling to scrutinize their own people for any signs of magickal activity.
Quote from: Rathustra on March 21, 2016, 06:28:08 PM
Quote from: Lizzie on March 21, 2016, 06:24:08 PM
I didn't like the sorcerer changes, I'm not too excited about this change either. I liked playing a whiran because of the combination of things is offered, not because of 1/4 of the things it offered. I definitely have no interest in playing a quarter-mage. What's worse, is there are some players (you know there are, and you know who you are) who will use their OOC knowledge in game, even if they insist they never do it. With these new quarter-mages, you can tell when they cast their very first spell which of the other 3/4s they do NOT possess. Any merchant/illusionist is going to be "outed" by "those players" as someone who can be easily killed. With a whiran, you never knew which of their spells they had, but you knew that they had the potential to be horrendously deadly. Or tremendously stealthy. Or ridiculously spooky. Or be remarkably useful with their utility spells. Now - you will know if they don't have that potential as soon as you see the first spell they cast.
As it stands currently, before the rest of the changes are made, I don't like this at all. But I'll keep an open mind for when the rest of the changes are made. I kept an open mind when the sorcerer changes were made and however many years later, I still don't like them and I'm not likely to ever waste a special app on a sorcerer subguild.
1/3rd, third mages. The touched subguilds exist outside of the one-to-three split. I'd argue that knowing someone was a mage of a particular element gave you all the knowledge you needed to deal with them. Considering what was branched was certainly a source of uncertainty, but could be overcome by using further OOC knowledge to gauge how likely any given spell was of being available.
Splitting it three ways, given that these splits have overlapping spells, means that the situation is changed - perhaps not perfectly - but the 'sniffing' algorithm is different and has increased uncertainty in some areas.
At the end of the day though, if you fear what ill-willed players are going to do, you will always be on your back foot.
1) I wasn't understanding that there's some overlap. This helps, if I'm understanding better now (I don't know?)
2) Right, three ways - sorry. Got mixed up with the four aspects or four whatever - I get confused with this stuff (you know I'm the anti-twink right? I mean I actually know the coded formula and I still can't branch in 20 minutes like everyone else can!) :)
3) I really wish I could see an actual "touched" skills list. Because I'm totally not understanding that at all. This whole cantrip thing - can't we already do that with emotes? I mean - I DO already do that with emotes, so I'm not seeing why it was coded. Does this mean we are no longer allowed to use cantrips in emotes, because now it's circumventing the code?
Like Delirium, I'm concerned with the usefulness of the new subguilds, as I said in my previous post - I liked playing Whirans because of the combination of things, not any specific thing or even any specific type of things. It's the whole package that appeals to me. Without the whole package - it just kind of loses its appeal.
Quote from: Lizzie on March 21, 2016, 06:34:57 PM
Quote from: Rathustra on March 21, 2016, 06:28:08 PM
Quote from: Lizzie on March 21, 2016, 06:24:08 PM
I didn't like the sorcerer changes, I'm not too excited about this change either. I liked playing a whiran because of the combination of things is offered, not because of 1/4 of the things it offered. I definitely have no interest in playing a quarter-mage. What's worse, is there are some players (you know there are, and you know who you are) who will use their OOC knowledge in game, even if they insist they never do it. With these new quarter-mages, you can tell when they cast their very first spell which of the other 3/4s they do NOT possess. Any merchant/illusionist is going to be "outed" by "those players" as someone who can be easily killed. With a whiran, you never knew which of their spells they had, but you knew that they had the potential to be horrendously deadly. Or tremendously stealthy. Or ridiculously spooky. Or be remarkably useful with their utility spells. Now - you will know if they don't have that potential as soon as you see the first spell they cast.
As it stands currently, before the rest of the changes are made, I don't like this at all. But I'll keep an open mind for when the rest of the changes are made. I kept an open mind when the sorcerer changes were made and however many years later, I still don't like them and I'm not likely to ever waste a special app on a sorcerer subguild.
1/3rd, third mages. The touched subguilds exist outside of the one-to-three split. I'd argue that knowing someone was a mage of a particular element gave you all the knowledge you needed to deal with them. Considering what was branched was certainly a source of uncertainty, but could be overcome by using further OOC knowledge to gauge how likely any given spell was of being available.
Splitting it three ways, given that these splits have overlapping spells, means that the situation is changed - perhaps not perfectly - but the 'sniffing' algorithm is different and has increased uncertainty in some areas.
At the end of the day though, if you fear what ill-willed players are going to do, you will always be on your back foot.
1) I wasn't understanding that there's some overlap. This helps, if I'm understanding better now (I don't know?)
2) Right, three ways - sorry. Got mixed up with the four aspects or four whatever - I get confused with this stuff (you know I'm the anti-twink right? I mean I actually know the coded formula and I still can't branch in 20 minutes like everyone else can!) :)
3) I really wish I could see an actual "touched" skills list. Because I'm totally not understanding that at all. This whole cantrip thing - can't we already do that with emotes? I mean - I DO already do that with emotes, so I'm not seeing why it was coded. Does this mean we are no longer allowed to use cantrips in emotes, because now it's circumventing the code?
Like Delirium, I'm concerned with the usefulness of the new subguilds, as I said in my previous post - I liked playing Whirans because of the combination of things, not any specific thing or even any specific type of things. It's the whole package that appeals to me. Without the whole package - it just kind of loses its appeal.
Try checking out http://armageddon.org/help/view/Cantrip for some hints on what we mean by 'touched' subguilds and their relation to cantrips. Any mage can still emote cantrips. I will try and get a touched help file out tomorrow.
I can't offer any consolation with regards to packages. This change undeniably changes the way that elementalists operate and the split will be the love/hate divide.
Quote from: Lizzie on March 21, 2016, 06:34:57 PM
Like Delirium, I'm concerned with the usefulness of the new subguilds, as I said in my previous post - I liked playing Whirans because of the combination of things, not any specific thing or even any specific type of things. It's the whole package that appeals to me. Without the whole package - it just kind of loses its appeal.
There are definite negatives about not having the FULL KIT of magic.
But think of all the positives:
You can now take the potential power of all the mundane guilds and add a smattering of whiran power.
The potential power, WAY outweighs the downsides.
A mage who can kill things with magic, then actually has skill at skinning them. Less waste when out killing critters with your mage.
There is a ton of combos that just seem outright amazing.
Jesus Christ, five pages in an hour.
Honestly this change makes more sense. Now there will be far more people who 'specialize in something' rather than an overwhelming 99% who 'learn everything perfectly.'
With regard to the gemmed: Removing their appeal as a place to develop PCs into solely magickal characters was foreseen. Removing the attraction of Temples and the Quarter as a place to solely develop skills gives us space to possibly consider how we can make the role more nuanced without focusing on mechanical magickal power.
Some people don't want the smattering, they want all magick.
Personally I'm leery of Warriors getting magick. Buggers are hard enough to kill as it is without having good defense against bash, kick, and melee.
I'd say I hope the Warrior guild is going to get some love to help counterattack all the incoming Jedi, but any buffs to Warriors also buff mages... hrmph.
Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 21, 2016, 06:40:59 PM
Some people don't want the smattering, they want all magick.
Personally I'm leery of Warriors getting magick. Buggers are hard enough to kill as it is without having good defense against bash, kick, and melee.
I'd say I hope the Warrior guild is going to get some love to help counterattack all the incoming Jedi, but any buffs to Warriors also buff mages... hrmph.
You just gave me my next character concept, I'm making Zalanthan Mace Windu. Warrior Fire weapon guy.
lmao
Every post you make convinces me more and more that this change was a bad idea.
Making mages real people, combat-wise (I suck at fighting more than Amos does who is better than Talia who is worse than Malik) makes more sense than ALL MAGES BEING ON AN EQUAL FOOTING, ALWAYS AND FOREVER.
Quote from: Rathustra on March 21, 2016, 06:40:14 PM
With regard to the gemmed: Removing their appeal as a place to develop PCs into solely magickal characters was foreseen. Removing the attraction of Temples and the Quarter as a place to solely develop skills gives us space to possibly consider how we can make the role more nuanced without focusing on mechanical magickal power.
Please reconsider leaving the full elementalists implemented for PC's to play in addition to the Subguild elementalists. I like the new additions to the Subguilds, but IMHO I think it would be more effective to have full elementalists too.
Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 21, 2016, 06:44:32 PM
Every post you make convinces me more and more this change was a bad idea.
I am here to serve you heh. Don't be so cynical. I loved the Sorcerer changes and recommended them on an old account and look it, they did it.
Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 21, 2016, 06:44:32 PM
Every post you make convinces me more and more that this change was a bad idea.
To be fair, you could already make a self-buffing warrior sorcerer.
And I've heard of maybe one of those ever.
Success will be determined by how many threads dedicated to magick and its place in Zalanthas emerge each month.
I'm excited for the changes -- especially the documentation/help file updates about the qualia of magickal casting (inter alia).
(Also, no discussion about 'draw butterknife es'?????)
Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 21, 2016, 06:44:32 PM
Every post you make convinces me more and more that this change was a bad idea.
I don't know how serious you're being, but we will be watching these changes like hawks (silt). We are also looking at adjusting how we grant special applications for mage roles outside of a player's karma range. Having more graduation between magicker type gives us a way to evaluate whether or not to grant applications for the strongest (most karma-heavy) subguilds for a given element. This is part of the reason for introducing the 'touched' subguilds. They present an entry-level subguild for magickal RP for newer players, or people wanting to step up from Ruk/Vivaduan subguilds to Krathi/Whiran ones.
Quote from: Erythil on March 21, 2016, 06:47:25 PM
Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 21, 2016, 06:44:32 PM
Every post you make convinces me more and more that this change was a bad idea.
To be fair, you could already make a self-buffing warrior sorcerer.
And I've heard of maybe one of those ever.
While the spell lists were split up, the karma remained at 8. I was relieved at the time, because 4 Karma Sorcerer Subguilds (as they were originally marketed) sounded like a terrible idea. Keeping the Karma high kept their numbers low. This change, with a larger spread of magickers across fully fleshed guilds - is I think going to bring more mages in to the game. They might not be as strong, but they'll still be mages.
Quote from: Rathustra on March 21, 2016, 06:50:32 PM
Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 21, 2016, 06:44:32 PM
Every post you make convinces me more and more that this change was a bad idea.
I don't know how serious you're being, but we will be watching these changes like hawks (silt). We are also looking at adjusting how we grant special applications for mage roles outside of a player's karma range. Having more graduation between magicker type gives us a way to evaluate whether or not to grant applications for the strongest (most karma-heavy) subguilds for a given element. This is part of the reason for introducing the 'touched' subguilds. They present an entry-level subguild for magickal RP for newer players, or people wanting to step up from Ruk/Vivaduan subguilds to Krathi/Whiran ones.
Can't you just let me worship Khorne in game and grant some magickal immunity or something.
Also the "you" was not you, Rath. Just in case you thought it was. Sorry.
Quote from: Warsong on March 21, 2016, 06:34:22 PM
...While I'll lose absolutely no sleep over seeing less gemmed around, we do have an entire quarter of Allanak devoted to them and it'll be kinda weird if that ends up being empty...
Quarter does not mean 1/4th of the town in this case, it's just a part of the city. The "built out" parts of Allanak are most certainly not to scale. It's like going to New Orleans and talking about "The French Quarter" being an entire quarter of the city (not the case). The word "district" would probably be more appropriate in most respects, but it is what it is.
I will agree with BS partially in that I'd rather have seen additional anti-magic tools than a total across the board removal of some of the impossible-to-counter magic powers.
Amazing and very interesting. Thanks staff!
Quote from: Erythil on March 21, 2016, 06:57:06 PM
I will agree with BS partially in that I'd rather have seen additional anti-magic tools than a total across the board removal of some of the impossible-to-counter magic powers.
I don't think we've lost too many of those, Erythil. We've lost some of the more powerful synergistic combinations inherent in the old Guilds... but if you want to set someone on fire or turn their blood in to poison I think you still have the means. And you have a much more viable Guild chassis to put it on.
You just can't be the great Supporter, and Hexer, and scout all in the same PC anymore. At least, you can't accomplish everything strictly through magick.
Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 21, 2016, 06:59:37 PM
Quote from: Erythil on March 21, 2016, 06:57:06 PM
I will agree with BS partially in that I'd rather have seen additional anti-magic tools than a total across the board removal of some of the impossible-to-counter magic powers.
I don't think we've lost too many of those, Erythil. We've lost some of the more powerful synergistic combinations inherent in the old Guilds... but if you want to set someone on fire or turn their blood in to poison I think you still have the means. And you have a much more viable Guild chassis to put it on.
You just can't be the great Supporter, and Hexer, and scout all in the same PC anymore. At least, you can't accomplish everything strictly through magick.
Drovians and nilazi had some very very powerful options unique to them exclusively.
And I don't see why a strong mage who trades mundane abilities for his prowess is so bad. No one seems to think it's silly that merchants can be good at making literally everything that exists.
Ummh. Actually, I honestly imagine there will be an 'increase' in gemmed population. To a point of ridiculous.
A legitimized group of mundanes with super powers? A group of people who are greater in number then militia, have no restriction on sparring/combat abilities and can do shit like ... illusion aspect, or guile aspect? Oash is going to become the scariest house ever. I really hope the political backlash for employing mages is intensified for them. Especially if they suddenly get Elites AND magickers at the same time.
Guys? This didnt make magickers weaker. This made them insanely more powerful.
A templar has political/social restricitons on sparring and improving his combat. Not counting spells, a skilled ranger could kill a Templar one on one, no sweat. Now ... you'll have a skilled ranger/warrior AND spells.
Assassin+Illusion:Scaaaaaary.
Quote from: Erythil on March 21, 2016, 07:01:55 PM
Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 21, 2016, 06:59:37 PM
Quote from: Erythil on March 21, 2016, 06:57:06 PM
I will agree with BS partially in that I'd rather have seen additional anti-magic tools than a total across the board removal of some of the impossible-to-counter magic powers.
I don't think we've lost too many of those, Erythil. We've lost some of the more powerful synergistic combinations inherent in the old Guilds... but if you want to set someone on fire or turn their blood in to poison I think you still have the means. And you have a much more viable Guild chassis to put it on.
You just can't be the great Supporter, and Hexer, and scout all in the same PC anymore. At least, you can't accomplish everything strictly through magick.
Drovians and nilazi had some very very powerful options unique to them exclusively.
And I don't see why a strong mage who trades mundane abilities for his prowess is so bad. No one seems to think it's silly that merchants can be good at making literally everything that exists.
I do. I'd much rather play a Ranger/Mastercrafter sub (which is now way easier to do, woo hoo!) than some merchant who's life is defined by crafting and who is totally helpless outside of a workshop.
In that respect this change is a good one as it forces people to round out their characters. I'm just not really looking forward to a bunch of magick getting slung around, however minor.
I don't know about this. It's a change and that always makes me nervous. I like that elementalists can have guilds like everyone else. However I hate to see what were some fun combinations gone forever. This system defiantly uses magick as a way to add flavor to the main guilds. It could make some of them very powerful, perhaps over powered.
Is there going to be some kind of review period and player feedback mechanism to adjust things if necessary?
Honestly, I hope we see the return of full magicker guilds (or at least 2/3rds full magicker guilds that can be made a full magicker with the right subguild) with the main guild revamp. This feels like removing all of the caster classes from a Dark Sun PHB and replacing them with mutually exclusive level 1 feats. It's a little too radical for my tastes.
Quote from: Rathustra on March 21, 2016, 06:50:32 PM
Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 21, 2016, 06:44:32 PM
Every post you make convinces me more and more that this change was a bad idea.
I don't know how serious you're being, but we will be watching these changes like hawks (silt).
I totally misread the end of this line, and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dkWHaiNXbjQ immediately came to mind. XD (nsfw language)
My initial thought of this change was resistance, and trying to convince myself to be up in arms. (I think mainly because I spent the last week brainstorming my first Nilazi) An hour or so later, and I think I absolutely love this change. I can't really put into coherent words why I love it, but I just feel it will be great for the game as a whole, as well as adding more options and variety for play. (In my perfect world, a classless, point buy system would come to Armageddon, but I know it never will.)
For those worried about sniffing, or clans suddenly going into overdrive to pick out potential gicks, because of the change - report that kind of activity. Absolutely report it, because it is poor play, and should be brought to light.
Looking at the cantrips help file; will these be emote only options for players, or is the risk of being caught something that might be tied to a fighter krathi (touched or aspect) suddenly frying Lord Templar Hardnose's robes with a random belch?
Quote from: Hicksville Hoochie on March 21, 2016, 07:06:36 PM
Quote from: Rathustra on March 21, 2016, 06:50:32 PM
Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 21, 2016, 06:44:32 PM
Every post you make convinces me more and more that this change was a bad idea.
I don't know how serious you're being, but we will be watching these changes like hawks (silt).
I totally misread the end of this line, and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dkWHaiNXbjQ immediately came to mind. XD (nsfw language)
My initial thought of this change was resistance, and trying to convince myself to be up in arms. (I think mainly because I spent the last week brainstorming my first Nilazi) An hour or so later, and I think I absolutely love this change. I can't really put into coherent words why I love it, but I just feel it will be great for the game as a whole, as well as adding more options and variety for play. (In my perfect world, a classless, point buy system would come to Armageddon, but I know it never will.)
For those worried about sniffing, or clans suddenly going into overdrive to pick out potential gicks, because of the change - report that kind of activity. Absolutely report it, because it is poor play, and should be brought to light.
Looking at the cantrips help file; will these be emote only options for players, or is the risk of being caught something that might be tied to a fighter krathi (touched or aspect) suddenly frying Lord Templar Hardnose's robes with a random belch?
Cantrips will continue to operate as they always have. Staff animation of cantrips is done after assessing the manifestation status and degree of control we consider a magicker to have. Usually we get this information from reports, biographies and previous observation of your PC.
Quote from: Dar on March 21, 2016, 07:03:07 PM
Ummh. Actually, I honestly imagine there will be an 'increase' in gemmed population. To a point of ridiculous.
A legitimized group of mundanes with super powers? A group of people who are greater in number then militia, have no restriction on sparring/combat abilities and can do shit like ... illusion aspect, or guile aspect? Oash is going to become the scariest house ever. I really hope the political backlash for employing mages is intensified for them. Especially if they suddenly get Elites AND magickers at the same time.
Guys? This didnt make magickers weaker. This made them insanely more powerful.
A templar has political/social restricitons on sparring and improving his combat. Not counting spells, a skilled ranger could kill a Templar one on one, no sweat. Now ... you'll have a skilled ranger/warrior AND spells.
Assassin+Illusion:Scaaaaaary.
Not really. In fact, not at all. As soon as you're seen casting a spell you're outted and either hunted down/PKed or gemmed/tolerated only in limited parts of the game world. That's exactly as it was with the full spell list. Except - now - you don't even get the benefit of the full spell list for all the risk you take.
Also - very very disappointing, I checked my guild options, and now realize all I see are the non-karma options. I have plenty of karma but none of it grants me anything on the main guild list anymore. This has 5 karma, that has 4 karma, the other has 6 karma, I have no idea what's available to me anymore without having to special app.
Quote from: Lizzie on March 21, 2016, 07:10:03 PM
Quote from: Dar on March 21, 2016, 07:03:07 PM
Ummh. Actually, I honestly imagine there will be an 'increase' in gemmed population. To a point of ridiculous.
A legitimized group of mundanes with super powers? A group of people who are greater in number then militia, have no restriction on sparring/combat abilities and can do shit like ... illusion aspect, or guile aspect? Oash is going to become the scariest house ever. I really hope the political backlash for employing mages is intensified for them. Especially if they suddenly get Elites AND magickers at the same time.
Guys? This didnt make magickers weaker. This made them insanely more powerful.
A templar has political/social restricitons on sparring and improving his combat. Not counting spells, a skilled ranger could kill a Templar one on one, no sweat. Now ... you'll have a skilled ranger/warrior AND spells.
Assassin+Illusion:Scaaaaaary.
Not really. In fact, not at all. As soon as you're seen casting a spell you're outted and either hunted down/PKed or gemmed/tolerated only in limited parts of the game world. That's exactly as it was with the full spell list. Except - now - you don't even get the benefit of the full spell list for all the risk you take.
Also - very very disappointing, I checked my guild options, and now realize all I see are the non-karma options. I have plenty of karma but none of it grants me anything on the main guild list anymore. This has 5 karma, that has 4 karma, the other has 6 karma, I have no idea what's available to me anymore without having to special app.
Quote from: The FAQ linked at the start of this thread
What are the new karma levels?
1 karma:
- Water touched.
- Stone touched.
2 karma:
- Rukkian aspect of protection.
- Rukkian aspect of creation.
- Rukkian aspect of empowerment.
- Vivaduan aspect of healing.
- Vivaduan aspect of corruption.
- Vivaduan aspect of creation.
3 karma:
- Fire touched.
- Wind touched.
4 karma:
- Krathi aspect of guile.
- Whiran aspect of tempest.
5 karma:
- Krathi aspect of agony.
- Whiran aspect of travel.
6 karma
- Whiran aspect of illusion.
- Krathi aspect of devastation.
FAQ (http://gdb.armageddon.org/index.php/topic,50864.msg934829.html#msg934829)
Quote from: seidhr on March 21, 2016, 06:55:37 PM
Quote from: Warsong on March 21, 2016, 06:34:22 PM
...While I'll lose absolutely no sleep over seeing less gemmed around, we do have an entire quarter of Allanak devoted to them and it'll be kinda weird if that ends up being empty...
Quarter does not mean 1/4th of the town in this case, it's just a part of the city. The "built out" parts of Allanak are most certainly not to scale. It's like going to New Orleans and talking about "The French Quarter" being an entire quarter of the city (not the case). The word "district" would probably be more appropriate in most respects, but it is what it is.
That's what I meant. It
s called a "quarter," though. It's a whole sector of the city, with its own apartments and shops and all kinds of stuff. I can't see why anybody would want to play a temple mage with this change, or at least not enough to make such a large portion of the city feel like it has any purpose. They'll play rogues mages, or they'll play ranger-with-buffs and roam around the world.
I'm mostly happy with this. But like most I think I'm going to miss the quasi elements largely for thematic reasons.
Seriously. This has been long overdue.
Questions for staff:
Will there be support for characters that want to go "all the way" and become the invokers of armageddon? I.E. mages that focus entirely gaining power through magick? We used to have something like that before sorcerers were split up.
Are there any planned changes for mage progression? I'm hoping for something more interesting than casting spells ad nauseum.
Psionicist subguilds? (PSI INTERCEPT 2016)
Quote from: Jingo on March 21, 2016, 07:16:24 PM
Are there any planned changes for mage progression? I'm hoping for something more interesting than casting spells ad nauseum.
This, is the only thing I dislike about mages. If you want to learn X spell that's three spells down, you gotta grind through three spells just to get X spell.
I never really bitch too loudly about it though, because for the life of me, I couldn't think of a better way to improve it than the grind.
Maybe if magick was a skill in general from use, instead of per spell. But even that, would probably take a whole re-write of code.
Quote from: Jingo on March 21, 2016, 07:16:24 PM
I'm mostly happy with this. But like most I think I'm going to miss the quasi elements largely for thematic reasons.
Seriously. This has been long overdue.
Questions for staff:
Will there be support for characters that want to go "all the way" and become the invokers of armageddon? I.E. mages that focus entirely gaining power through magick? We used to have something like that before sorcerers were split up.
This is currently not something we are considering. The closest thing we have to this now are the sorcerer subguilds. In which case this answer ties into my answer to your next question:
Quote from: Jingo on March 21, 2016, 07:16:24 PM
Are there any planned changes for mage progression? I'm hoping for something more interesting than casting spells ad nauseum.
There are no planned changes in this area at the moment.
Quote from: Jingo on March 21, 2016, 07:16:24 PM
Psionicist subguilds? (PSI INTERCEPT 2016)
We are going through every guild as part of the guild renovation project.
I'm off to bed now, so I am handing you over to any other member of staff involved in the project to answer specific questions - or any member of staff who wants to quote the FAQ or help files. Night all!
Quote from: Warsong on March 21, 2016, 07:15:45 PM
That's what I meant. It s called a "quarter," though. It's a whole sector of the city, with its own apartments and shops and all kinds of stuff. I can't see why anybody would want to play a gemmed mage with this change, or at least not enough to make such a large portion of the city feel like it has any purpose.
Quarter does not literally mean 25% of a city, and often has not through history. The Gemmed section of town is also not to scale (just like the rest of Allanak).
As for whether you think this change makes the Gemmed character more or less appealing, that comes down to what you personally envision the Gemmed role to be. As we don't have good documentation, currently its to each his or her own.
I'm not sure what it is, but something about just isn't seeming to sit right with me over it. I can't even really effectively describe it, which is making me think it's just aversion to drastic change, at this very moment.
I will say...please keep this under control. Please don't make this into magick hidden everywhere. When I talked about rogue magickers, I wasn't talking about them hiding everywhere under my nose; I was talking about a very real separatist sort of movement that was only truly visible in the gemmed's eye (or in drastic situations that would, of course, only deepen the lack of understanding of the populace and their distrust). You've iterated that you'll be watching it, but I'm saying please anyway, because the hype appears to already be building up into meta-powers and how to use it to become uberpowerful the fastest and greatest.
The moment that I see clans finding out about it and immediately finding it useful rather than flabbergastingly deceitful and hard to deal with, I'll be having a very hard time. Right now, that possibility is what I'm kinda dreading.
Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 21, 2016, 07:21:19 PM
Quote from: Warsong on March 21, 2016, 07:15:45 PM
That's what I meant. It s called a "quarter," though. It's a whole sector of the city, with its own apartments and shops and all kinds of stuff. I can't see why anybody would want to play a gemmed mage with this change, or at least not enough to make such a large portion of the city feel like it has any purpose.
Quarter does not literally mean 25% of a city, and often has not through history. The Gemmed section of town is also not to scale (just like the rest of Allanak).
I know that! I referred to it as a "quarter" because it's called the Gemmed Quarter. I don't know what your point is. Why does it matter that it isn't actually 25%? It's a significant portion of the city, that's what matters.
Quote from: Asmoth on March 21, 2016, 07:20:03 PM
Quote from: Jingo on March 21, 2016, 07:16:24 PM
Are there any planned changes for mage progression? I'm hoping for something more interesting than casting spells ad nauseum.
This, is the only thing I dislike about mages. If you want to learn X spell that's three spells down, you gotta grind through three spells just to get X spell.
I never really bitch too loudly about it though, because for the life of me, I couldn't think of a better way to improve it than the grind.
Maybe if magick was a skill in general from use, instead of per spell. But even that, would probably take a whole re-write of code.
If only there were some way for mundane skills to atrophy away as elementalists skills were used more and more. Maybe a ranger/merchant/burglar/assassin/warrior/pickpocket would become a full elementalist over time and leave their old skills behind as a subguild. It'd be kinda cool in rare cases for older elementalists who leaned heavily on their elementalist abilities.
I mean...are we about to turn into Avatar: The last airbender, up in here?
Quote from: Warsong on March 21, 2016, 07:24:19 PM
Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 21, 2016, 07:21:19 PM
Quote from: Warsong on March 21, 2016, 07:15:45 PM
That's what I meant. It s called a "quarter," though. It's a whole sector of the city, with its own apartments and shops and all kinds of stuff. I can't see why anybody would want to play a gemmed mage with this change, or at least not enough to make such a large portion of the city feel like it has any purpose.
Quarter does not literally mean 25% of a city, and often has not through history. The Gemmed section of town is also not to scale (just like the rest of Allanak).
I know that! I referred to it as a "quarter" because it's called the Gemmed Quarter. I don't know what your point is. Why does it matter that it isn't actually 25%? It's a significant portion of the city, that's what matters.
What he means... Is that because it's codedly a huge part of the city, doesn't mean it really is. There is way more Allanak than we can walk in. Virtual streets, alleys houses etc.
Don't get hung up on the physics of it. Otherwise you'll lose your mind when you figure out you can walk out the west gate and around the city to the salt road in a tenth of the rooms it takes walking through the city.
Not everything is built to scale.
I dislike the change in code, as far as skills and so on. I think it makes the elementalist subguilds too powerful.
What I love though is the fact that elementalism is no longer a driving force behind the character motivation. That's what usually kept me away from playing mages too often, the difficulties in grokking their motivations. Now though ... they're just normal mundanes who were handed a bazooka. No problem
Quote from: Armaddict on March 21, 2016, 07:26:18 PM
I mean...are we about to turn into Avatar: The last airbender, up in here?
No but fuck wouldn't it be cool if your characters casted with martial arts forms instead of random words and gesticulations?
Because you still seemed hung up on it. The Gemmed Quarter is not a significantly large portion of the City in-character. It's a crotch of a district wedged between Caravan's road and the Rinth. It does have a fair bit of amenities (though it lacks others like a good tavern and rumor board), but that's more a fault of the rest of the City being underdeveloped than the Gemmed section being over developed.
I think it will get a lot more use as a lot more Gemmed will be rolled up by people who want to play the warriors, rangers, and assassins with supplemental magick.
Quote from: Armaddict on March 21, 2016, 07:26:18 PM
I mean...are we about to turn into Avatar: The last airbender, up in here?
can I be maskdude. he hates them benders rite
Quote from: Rathustra on March 21, 2016, 07:12:34 PM
Quote from: Lizzie on March 21, 2016, 07:10:03 PM
Quote from: Dar on March 21, 2016, 07:03:07 PM
Ummh. Actually, I honestly imagine there will be an 'increase' in gemmed population. To a point of ridiculous.
A legitimized group of mundanes with super powers? A group of people who are greater in number then militia, have no restriction on sparring/combat abilities and can do shit like ... illusion aspect, or guile aspect? Oash is going to become the scariest house ever. I really hope the political backlash for employing mages is intensified for them. Especially if they suddenly get Elites AND magickers at the same time.
Guys? This didnt make magickers weaker. This made them insanely more powerful.
A templar has political/social restricitons on sparring and improving his combat. Not counting spells, a skilled ranger could kill a Templar one on one, no sweat. Now ... you'll have a skilled ranger/warrior AND spells.
Assassin+Illusion:Scaaaaaary.
Not really. In fact, not at all. As soon as you're seen casting a spell you're outted and either hunted down/PKed or gemmed/tolerated only in limited parts of the game world. That's exactly as it was with the full spell list. Except - now - you don't even get the benefit of the full spell list for all the risk you take.
Also - very very disappointing, I checked my guild options, and now realize all I see are the non-karma options. I have plenty of karma but none of it grants me anything on the main guild list anymore. This has 5 karma, that has 4 karma, the other has 6 karma, I have no idea what's available to me anymore without having to special app.
Quote from: The FAQ linked at the start of this thread
What are the new karma levels?
1 karma:
- Water touched.
- Stone touched.
2 karma:
- Rukkian aspect of protection.
- Rukkian aspect of creation.
- Rukkian aspect of empowerment.
- Vivaduan aspect of healing.
- Vivaduan aspect of corruption.
- Vivaduan aspect of creation.
3 karma:
- Fire touched.
- Wind touched.
4 karma:
- Krathi aspect of guile.
- Whiran aspect of tempest.
5 karma:
- Krathi aspect of agony.
- Whiran aspect of travel.
6 karma
- Whiran aspect of illusion.
- Krathi aspect of devastation.
FAQ (http://gdb.armageddon.org/index.php/topic,50864.msg934829.html#msg934829)
Er that's not what I meant Rath, sorry! I meant very literally - that I can no longer see what *I* have available to *me.* I can read what everyone has the potential to have to them. But previously - I was able to type O and see all the stuff I could do. PLUS I knew that all the subguilds except for the sorcerer ones, were available to me - all without special apping.
I don't know how many karma points i have anymore. I haven't had to check, because I only had to type O to see the entire list of everything I could do. If I wanted to do more, I'd special app it.
Now - I'm totally lost. There are more options available to me that I *cannot* see on a simple easy list, than there are options to me that I can see.
Quote from: BaskeelzQuote from: Armaddict on March 21, 2016, 07:26:18 PM
I mean...are we about to turn into Avatar: The last airbender, up in here?
can I be maskdude. he hates them benders rite
Amon, you filthy casual.
I think we've worked ourselves into a pigeon-hold about what it means to be Gemmed.
Before this change, Gemmed were only walking magick-sacks with the possibility of having some useful mundane skill through a sub-guild. If you've ever been into the Gemmed quarter you can see that there's Gemmed who practice all sorts of skills other than magick.
Now, players are going to have to get used to being that sort of Gemmed.
Quote from: Lizzie on March 21, 2016, 07:29:16 PM
Quote from: Rathustra on March 21, 2016, 07:12:34 PM
Quote from: Lizzie on March 21, 2016, 07:10:03 PM
Quote from: Dar on March 21, 2016, 07:03:07 PM
Ummh. Actually, I honestly imagine there will be an 'increase' in gemmed population. To a point of ridiculous.
A legitimized group of mundanes with super powers? A group of people who are greater in number then militia, have no restriction on sparring/combat abilities and can do shit like ... illusion aspect, or guile aspect? Oash is going to become the scariest house ever. I really hope the political backlash for employing mages is intensified for them. Especially if they suddenly get Elites AND magickers at the same time.
Guys? This didnt make magickers weaker. This made them insanely more powerful.
A templar has political/social restricitons on sparring and improving his combat. Not counting spells, a skilled ranger could kill a Templar one on one, no sweat. Now ... you'll have a skilled ranger/warrior AND spells.
Assassin+Illusion:Scaaaaaary.
Not really. In fact, not at all. As soon as you're seen casting a spell you're outted and either hunted down/PKed or gemmed/tolerated only in limited parts of the game world. That's exactly as it was with the full spell list. Except - now - you don't even get the benefit of the full spell list for all the risk you take.
Also - very very disappointing, I checked my guild options, and now realize all I see are the non-karma options. I have plenty of karma but none of it grants me anything on the main guild list anymore. This has 5 karma, that has 4 karma, the other has 6 karma, I have no idea what's available to me anymore without having to special app.
Quote from: The FAQ linked at the start of this thread
What are the new karma levels?
1 karma:
- Water touched.
- Stone touched.
2 karma:
- Rukkian aspect of protection.
- Rukkian aspect of creation.
- Rukkian aspect of empowerment.
- Vivaduan aspect of healing.
- Vivaduan aspect of corruption.
- Vivaduan aspect of creation.
3 karma:
- Fire touched.
- Wind touched.
4 karma:
- Krathi aspect of guile.
- Whiran aspect of tempest.
5 karma:
- Krathi aspect of agony.
- Whiran aspect of travel.
6 karma
- Whiran aspect of illusion.
- Krathi aspect of devastation.
FAQ (http://gdb.armageddon.org/index.php/topic,50864.msg934829.html#msg934829)
Er that's not what I meant Rath, sorry! I meant very literally - that I can no longer see what *I* have available to *me.* I can read what everyone has the potential to have to them. But previously - I was able to type O and see all the stuff I could do. PLUS I knew that all the subguilds except for the sorcerer ones, were available to me - all without special apping.
I don't know how many karma points i have anymore. I haven't had to check, because I only had to type O to see the entire list of everything I could do. If I wanted to do more, I'd special app it.
Now - I'm totally lost. There are more options available to me that I *cannot* see on a simple easy list, than there are options to me that I can see.
Could you put a request in with a log of what you're seeing and a description of what you expect to see? I'm off to bed now, but in case there's a problem having it in the system might mean someone sees it before I wake up.
The only thing that would make this better in my eyes is if the magick cast didn't give away element.
I feel it would make the magicker more mysterious and less likely to be (sniffed out and countered).
But hey, we can't have everything!
Quote from: RogueGunslinger on March 21, 2016, 07:29:50 PM
Quote from: BaskeelzQuote from: Armaddict on March 21, 2016, 07:26:18 PM
I mean...are we about to turn into Avatar: The last airbender, up in here?
can I be maskdude. he hates them benders rite
Amon, you filthy casual.
long as he hates them gickers.
Man now I want to make Giant Dad "the fatherly half-giant", going around Zalanthas with my bone zweihander and asking magickers "wot rings u got bithc?" before killing them.
Quote from: RogueGunslinger on March 21, 2016, 07:29:50 PM
Quote from: BaskeelzQuote from: Armaddict on March 21, 2016, 07:26:18 PM
I mean...are we about to turn into Avatar: The last airbender, up in here?
can I be maskdude. he hates them benders rite
Amon, you filthy casual.
Mask dude actually was a bender.
I just can't win with this change can I.
Rath, the problem is that the list of karma options brought up by pressing O after logging in only shows available races and guilds, not subguilds.
(https://i.ytimg.com/vi/rt4AmH35png/maxresdefault.jpg)
Cool that this seems so well received.
Bummer I'll never play a Nilazi. I've never been interested in playing a magicker, except for that one.
I'm so stoked about this.
So stoked... dammit. Damn you all. I'm trying to stop playing this game and you go and do this!
DAMN YOU CRACKAGEDDON!
Quote from: Erythil on March 21, 2016, 05:43:05 PM
I deeply dislike removing entire elements from play.
I like magical subguilds. But I also deeply dislike removing full-guild elementalists as an option.
This greatly diminishes my desire to play, since I was always aiming towards getting enough karma to play a powerful magic class.
Count me in among those who dislike the total removal of multiple guilds. My dislike for this change is so strong that nothing is really going to change my opinion unless those guilds are brought back as options. I will end my comments here as I am sure the staff decision on this matter is "final."
Just to be clear I do love the magical subguilds. I just don't see why it had to include removing all the Magick mainguilds.
I'm turning into BadSkeelz. I'm seriously not going to like this change in the short term. Magick-lite? Nope. Magick eeeeeeeverywhere. Good thing Tuluk's closed or we'd get to see templar heads pop off from the sudden magick overload that I think this change is going to bring.
Instead of some people that can do serious magick, it's going to be a bunch of people that can do a little bit of magick. Lots of people are going to want to dabble with these options.
Ranger Jedi's man, ranger fucking jedi's. :-\
I wish a TRUE elementalist was still an option. Would be nice to have more limited subs and then the true elementalists. :-[
Quote from: Majikal on March 21, 2016, 07:59:54 PM
I'm turning into BadSkeelz
Ranger Jedi's man, ranger fucking jedi's. :-\
(http://static.images.publisher.attn.com/sites/default/files/p48uldt.jpg)
edit: R.I.P. Elkran/con artist concept.
Quote from: Majikal on March 21, 2016, 07:59:54 PM
I'm turning into BadSkeelz. I'm seriously not going to like this change in the short term. Magick-lite? Nope. Magick eeeeeeeverywhere. Good thing Tuluk's closed or we'd get to see templar heads pop off from the sudden magick overload that I think this change is going to bring.
Instead of some people that can do serious magick, it's going to be a bunch of people that can do a little bit of magick. Lots of people are going to want to dabble with these options.
Ranger Jedi's man, ranger fucking jedi's. :-\
I wish a TRUE elementalist was still an option. Would be nice to have more limited subs and then the true elementalists. :-[
You are not stoked to play a ranger who is out minding his own business, and all the sudden a mek or met rolls in and he waves his hand and says, "I'm not the ranger you want to eat." and then pets the beast?
Or a warrior who shoots fire when he farts?
A burglar who literally can vanish?
The opportunities are everywhere!
(http://cdn.meme.am/instances/55311131.jpg)
I really don't understand why Elkrosi, Drovians, and Nilazi were removed. It says it's because the guilds were added piecemeal and don't have a strong theme, but didn't you just break the other guilds down and sort their spells out by theme? Why can't there be 2 Elkrosi subguilds, one for pew pew lightning and one for the buffs and energy restoration effects? I haven't played either of the other classes, but I don't care if a spell or two is tossed aside because it isn't thematic, but I feel there was definitely a way Elkrosians could have been split to make a couple subguilds at least.
And while on one hand I am excited to mix my favorite class with a magic subguild I'm also not at all sure what each even does? Will each subguild have it's own documentation explaining what they have available? As of now I feel like staff just put in all this work redoing the subguild help files so players know exactly what they're going to get, and now there are 16 more that as far as I can tell only have vague references to what they do? I know what a Vivaduan can do because I played them, but I only have a vague understanding of what will be on my spell list if I make a Corruption aspect Viv.
Quote from: Asmoth on March 21, 2016, 08:04:41 PM
You are not stoked to play a ranger who is out minding his own business, and all the sudden a mek or met rolls in and he waves his hand and says, "I'm not the ranger you want to eat." and then pets the beast?
Or a warrior who shoots fire when he farts?
A burglar who literally can vanish?
The opportunities are everywhere!
You're right, this is going to be awful.
Fuck it
Change objective: BLOOD FOR THE BLOOD GOD
Quote from: lostinspace on March 21, 2016, 08:10:56 PM
And while on one hand I am excited to mix my favorite class with a magic subguild I'm also not at all sure what each even does? Will each subguild have it's own documentation explaining what they have available? As of now I feel like staff just put in all this work redoing the subguild help files so players know exactly what they're going to get, and now there are 16 more that as far as I can tell only have vague references to what they do? I know what a Vivaduan can do because I played them, but I only have a vague understanding of what will be on my spell list if I make a Corruption aspect Viv.
It's day one, and if you tell them what you're trying to accomplish in a question request, I'm sure they will point you in the right direction.
But I assume eventually it will be like subguilds and guilds will be. Very forthcoming of what you get. Thought I don't ever think they will list spell lists, because they have never listed spell lists before. But if they do, awesome.
Yeah, all this discussion has really made me want to do is start securing anti-mage concepts.
Quote from: Armaddict on March 21, 2016, 08:17:22 PM
Yeah, all this discussion has really made me want to do is start securing anti-mage concepts.
(http://i.imgur.com/5KamueQ.jpg)
Praise the Sun!
Quote from: Armaddict on March 21, 2016, 08:17:22 PM
Yeah, all this discussion has really made me want to do is start securing anti-mage concepts.
Amen.
#shine
Quote from: lostinspace on March 21, 2016, 08:10:56 PM
I really don't understand why Elkrosi, Drovians, and Nilazi were removed. It says it's because the guilds were added piecemeal and don't have a strong theme, but didn't you just break the other guilds down and sort their spells out by theme? Why can't there be 2 Elkrosi subguilds, one for pew pew lightning and one for the buffs and energy restoration effects? I haven't played either of the other classes, but I don't care if a spell or two is tossed aside because it isn't thematic, but I feel there was definitely a way Elkrosians could have been split to make a couple subguilds at least.
And while on one hand I am excited to mix my favorite class with a magic subguild I'm also not at all sure what each even does? Will each subguild have it's own documentation explaining what they have available? As of now I feel like staff just put in all this work redoing the subguild help files so players know exactly what they're going to get, and now there are 16 more that as far as I can tell only have vague references to what they do? I know what a Vivaduan can do because I played them, but I only have a vague understanding of what will be on my spell list if I make a Corruption aspect Viv.
Honestly? They have shit-ton of overlap with Whirans/Vivs/Ruks/Krathi's. They probably realized there was very little difference between some of the subguilds even though they were completely different elements. Also, consider the 1-2 niche and guild-defining spells they got would end up being the only class of these quasi-elemental subguilds picked.
I'm still pretty new and I've never played a magicker, but I hope this opens up more support role opportunities in major clans for magickers. Leaders have the potential to be more effective and get more shit done IC.
And LOL: "Warning - while you were typing 5 new replies have been posted. You may wish to review your post."
Here's one way to save what I (and apparently some other people) feel is a very unwanted decision:
Make all magick guilds subguilds, with whatever mindnumbingly convoluted third-mage 4-and-5-and-6-karma subsets of sub-subsets of aspects touches and doodads floats the collective staffs' boat. Remove the sorcerer "path" extended subguilds. Restore full-on sorcerers as 8-karma main guilds to be as insanely OP as they always used to be, and allow them to pick extended subguilds (if a person can be trusted to play an 8-karma guild, they sure as shit should be able to play a "formerly known as +3cgp" extended subguild)
Of course I'd never play another mage, since there won't be any such animal ever again if mages can't BE mages...but I'll definitely be special apping the sorcerer I was hoping to special app before you nerfed them.
Emotional vomit:
I can't recall the last time I something happened concerning Armageddon that hit me personally and decided not to just bite my tongue. Before the sorcerer change was announced I had -finally- gotten my fifth karma after about eight years of play, so I submitted the dwarven sorcerer concept that I had stewed on nearly that entire time, and was told of the upcoming changes, and thus was given an Enlightenment sorc. Less than a day played, and I was killed by a full sorc before they were force-stored. Lovely, lovely irony. But even then, I bit my tongue and when the change and reasons behind it were announced, I agreed that it fit better in the game world than dragon or avangion wannabes running around.
Re: This Change
I'm with Lizzie on the idea that 1/3-1/2 of an full elementalist's abilities isn't worth the the cost social exile and magick hunters.
I like that you can play more rounded out roles, but extended sub-guilds did that for us before the "no karma guild+karma subguild" rule, and they did a better job of it than the current change, in my opinion.
Drov & Elkros: I'm fine with some of their spells going back to krathis and Whirans like the old days or wherever else they end up. Playing them, to me always felt more like "one trick ponies" than all other guilds.
Nilaz: I've had the experience of playing around some exceptionally welled played Nilazi, and spoke to players and staff who had some really deep insights on the nature and psychological effects of having Nilaz be an innate part of you. This is something I very much hate to see leave the game.
And please spare me the "nothing is changing IC" BS we got with sorcs got neutered. If something is not accessible by players, it it might as well not be part of the game. It's of no more benefit, detriment, or use to us than knowing the names and pedigree of each of Tek's Harem. Being told "sorcerers are still part of the world, but not available to players", was like being a kid and being told not to touch your parents' pretty shiny things but still having to look at them sitting on the table in front of you every day just out of reach.
I really don't want to hurt anyone's feelings or belittle the vast amount of work people have put into this and upcoming changes. I know you are doing what you feel best for the current vision staff has for the future of the game, but I play Armageddon (and only Armageddon oddly enough) to help escape from the mundane and occasional powerlessness that is real life. I like pretending to be someone with semi-phenomenal nearly cosmic powers. I've never PKd with a magicker, I've always tried to add to others' stories to the best of my ability, and make desert encounters interesting for others. To be quite honest, with the sole exception of a mundane aide I played last year, playing Gicks is about all that give me any enjoyment out of the game. That may make me a poor role player, narrow minded, or whatever, but there it is.
Sorry so long, thought it would just be a few sentences, but sometimes you just have to throw it all out there and hope it helps you feel better. :(
I love this change, but I can agree with the wanting guilds for elkrosians, drov and nilaz. It would of made sense to do the same. Nilaz could of been an exception. I say this mostly because there have been elkrosi elementalist PCs and now I'm wondering about their temple. Also drovians and their temples and what we'll call them as "fellow" gemmed IC.
Hm... Nevermind. I sense there will be people who have shadowy powers and they'll be called drovians. And people who throw lightning bolts will be known as elkrosians. Good conversation.
I certain you can still special app for a character directly connected to an element and all of its aspects. Or maybe even... learn those other aspects. Interesting... (probably not learn, but it sounds cool)
I seriously can't wait to see some new actual roleplay with the witches who will no longer fear coming out into the light.
I will miss Nilzai as a natural predator of elementalist, even if most of them seemed content to fuck with mundanes or jump in to bed with elementalists (sometimes literally).
Quote from: Chettaman on March 21, 2016, 08:32:30 PM
I certain you can still special app for a character directly connected to an element and all of its aspects. Or maybe even... learn those other aspects. Interesting... (probably not learn, but it sounds cool)
I'm equally certain you can't as they've stated many times the full mage guilds are now unplayable.
I dunno, I'm still parsing out how I feel about this.
I can think of new concepts for Gemmed that this actually opens up, as long as they're willing to work directly with the templarate or .. whatever other options open up to them.
Can't make judgements on how well the subguild skills synergize, as I have no idea what they are. Which after ~14 years of playing is honestly kind of cool. Something new.
I will miss Nilazi and I hope they are brought back soon - all those new subguild elementalists are gonna need someone who can hunt them.
This seems like it's going to make magick a much more common thing.
I'm very pro-magick, I like seeing it in-game and I've probably had more experience with playing magicked up mundanes than most. I'm not the person on the GDB complaining about how powerful magick guilds were, or fearing for the relevance of my mundane. I think magick and psionics and all that is an interesting source of conflict, as both an inward and personal thing and as a point of outward conflict.
With that said, I'm concerned about what this is going to do to the line between magicker and mundane and the potential power spike associated with having a lot of karma.
The line between a magicker and a mundane was a decisive one and with it came a lot of clear cut expectations and consequences; social limits, coded power limits and all that kind of thing. You couldn't ever circumvent them without incurring some other manner of downside. These weren't grey areas where you could easily blow it off, either.
This was black and white, hard documented, hard coded.
My concern here is... almost everyone has one karma point.
It means everyone except the cutest of newbies is going to have the option of rocking some magick every single time they make a character. The coded limitation of having magick power was that you weren't capable of doing the things mundane characters could -- you couldn't get more than subguild level combat skills, you could never enjoy the range of craft options a merchant does and you could never benefit from the insurmountable freedoms of being a ranger.
Now? You are a mundane with all the competitive advantages it entails, except you're also going to have the benefits of buffs, debuffs, self-healing or direct damage.
I've had a number of PCs who walked around with magick enhancements and you go from being a powerful combatant to an unstoppable super soldier. With even a minor armor buff, my heavily armored and high end warrior was unassailable, even faced with warriors with superior skills -- advanced weapon skills? Is that a razor weapon? Gaze upon my shadow sword and weep, motherfuckers.
Magick on mundanes is incredibly powerful and with everyone having the option of having some flavor of magick, I can't imagine many people not taking full advantage.
This means more people playing magickers, more people being exposed to magick and a general degradation of the already faltering status quo.
As someone on the karma blacklist for what I can comfortably assume is forever, this also reinforces my view that there is almost no point in playing the game in a competitive manner without some karma. The difference in power scale between someone with extended subguild options and someone without them is already incredible. See: Warrior / Outdoorsman and Ranger / Rogue.
With every mundane now having the karma-based option to also throw down some fireballs, heal themselves or teleport around the game world, pure mundanes won't even have the relative safety net of rock-paper-scissors. There is no point in having a high bash skill to counter a Krathi when the Krathi can now block / parry you on equal terms and let you kill yourself on a damage shield.
I've seen what groups of magickers and mundanes can accomplish working in tandem and it's cool and fun to be a part of. This change seems like it's going to remove the mundanes from the equation and worse, it's going to leave people without non-mundane options without any real chance to compete with those who do.
I like magick, I want to claim cautious optimism, but I'm honestly just plain cautious.
Quote from: FantasyWriter on March 21, 2016, 08:30:22 PM
Emotional vomit:
I can't recall the last time I something happened concerning Armageddon that hit me personally and decided not to just bite my tongue. Before the sorcerer change was announced I had -finally- gotten my fifth karma after about eight years of play, so I submitted the dwarven sorcerer concept that I had stewed on nearly that entire time, and was told of the upcoming changes, and thus was given an Enlightenment sorc. Less than a day played, and I was killed by a full sorc before they were force-stored. Lovely, lovely irony. But even then, I bit my tongue and when the change and reasons behind it were announced, I agreed that it fit better in the game world than dragon or avangion wannabes running around.
This is pretty sad, sorry for the loss :/
Quote from: Vwest on March 21, 2016, 08:39:35 PM
Lots of valid points but some invalid concerns.
I think most of what you said is true, except for the Karma thing. I had at my max, I think four Karma, then I mouthed off to Nyr and that never ends well, and now have 1.
I have played, Stone, water, wind, fire and even a burglar/partial psionicist (Granted he died in like two days). All with 1 Karma.
So not having Karma doesn't mean they won't give you a shot at some interesting shit.
It just makes you have to work harder for it.
Quote from: Marauder Moe on March 21, 2016, 05:29:48 PM
Hate the loss of 3 whole elements. Contrived or not, they've been a part of the game for an extremely long time. Would like to see them woven back in as an identity, even if they never actually get a full 4 sub-guilds each.
I am pretty dismayed.
For one, these changes sunk about 5-10 concepts I had stored up for play. I am really regretting now that I didn't special app the PC I wanted to a couple weeks back, because now I'll never make it. Elkros and Nilaz were things I always had a ton of interest in playing, and I had a bunch of thoughts about Drovians (which I love) and Krathis.
I mean - why eliminate Drov, Elkros, and Nilaz? One of the things I've always loved is the diversity of elements. Tossing them out is only snuffing a lot of the diversity in Arm. I mean, I -might- be okay with it if those spells and abilities were pulled back into the other options so that the subs were expanded. Lightning being the province of whirans? Okay, fine. But I don't think that Drov, which is a pretty unique element, and Nilaz, which is super unique, should be taken away. There's a lot you miss out on by cutting out shadowy Drovians and evil Nilazis from the game, and I don't think that's beneficial. It just feels like a big chunk of what made Armageddon Arm just disappeared.
I'm also not sure what this is going to do for magick prevalence in game. I mean - why would you play a warrior when you could play a spell buffed warrior? Is there a reason that every loner indie ranger would ever not take a magick sub?
TLDR:
Wish Drov and Nilaz remained, at least.
Wish that full elementalists were still an option - though I would give their guilds some rudimentary mundane skills.
If I had known that this change was going to occur, I would've made my last main-guild mage a special-app Nilazi instead of what I ended up picking (which I only picked as a challenge to play something I really had no interest in, just to see if I could create some interest in playing it).
I'm flabbergasted. In a bad, bad way.
One, I wish staff would actually talk with players about massive, sweeping changes before pushing them out.
Two, I do not like what I see, at all. I think magick could have used some love or perhaps a refactor, but this was taking to it with a sledgehammer, and the pieces left . . .
Quote from: Vwest on March 21, 2016, 08:39:35 PM
Magick is actually scary now. Muahaha! Well... scarier then before.
I don't think it'll be more common than before and if it is, I can only hope as often as I usually do, that no one abuses their abilities and everyone roleplays to their fullest.
which... when I say it, god help us all.
I also wish the other elements stuck around. I say they should return!**
Just to reply to a melange of player concerns here. This post isn't directed at anyone in particular.
I don't think that looking at roles as if there is a "cost" to playing them is entirely accurate. As with any role before this change, you should focus on whether you enjoy something thematically. The idea of playing a magicker is not just about power, but about where they fit (or don't) in society. One part always came with the other. Now the power is different, but I think disregarding the change as "1/3rd of a magicker" or "pieces" isn't productive when you consider the myriad of gameplay changes that a change of this nature will undoubtedly bring. In other words, there is a net gain that I think we'll notice over time.
However, the idea of these roles having a "cost" to playing them is accurate in one sense. By picking a magicker guild, you're giving up a way your character could be versatile in another manner. Bearing in mind that no guild is completely good at everything, any guild+magicker_subguild combination is going to have weaknesses. That will at least partly blunt the concern of magickers becoming overpowered, and will be addressed further during the guild revamp.
My personal prediction is that magickers will become more common in the short-term (for curiosity's sake), and about as common as they are now (or rarer) in the long term (as people realize that their magicker characters are missing other abilities that the player favors).
Yeeeeeah, the more I think this over, the more I think this was not that well thought out.
Like it was nerd splerging over a cool idea versus objectively looking at what things it would affect.
Guys, look at it from this perspective.
It is what it is.
You can't change it, you just have to live in the world with it.
I personally would have LOVED to play a Nilaz, but eh, shit happens.
I also personally would have LOVED to play a full sorcerer. But shit happens like a year ago or whenever that happened.
Look for the positives and not the negatives. You literally went from WATER, STONE, LIGHTNING, SHADOWS, VOID, FIRE AND WIND. -only, with the chance of some shitty half assed subguild options-.
To literally massive combinations of abilities and talents.
If you look at it at it's basest number, that's 6x4=24 options, then you add in the differences that can be had and you're at petty staggering numbers of potential combos. WAY less chance of two mages being cookie cutter.
I don't have an opinion one way or the other, and I probably don't know what I'm speaking about, but couldn't staff consider leaving in the full mage options for Elkoz, Nilaz, Drov etc at a higher Karma cost, or at least still open for special application? This way it doesn't leave a gaping hole for some people which had these concepts planned, and doesn't eliminate a piece of the game's history. Just a thought!
guys just wait, this isn't even our final form
Quote from: Asmoth on March 21, 2016, 09:00:48 PM
Guys, look at it from this perspective.
It is what it is.
You can't change it, you just have to live in the world with it.
I personally would have LOVED to play a Nilaz, but eh, shit happens.
I also personally would have LOVED to play a full sorcerer. But shit happens like a year ago or whenever that happened.
Look for the positives and not the negatives. You literally went from WATER, STONE, LIGHTNING, SHADOWS, VOID, FIRE AND WIND. -only, with the chance of some shitty half assed subguild options-.
To literally massive combinations of abilities and talents.
If you look at it at it's basest number, that's 6x4=24 options, then you add in the differences that can be had and you're at petty staggering numbers of potential combos. WAY less chance of two mages being cookie cutter.
The problem here being, with the existence of ESG, cookie cutter went out the window a long time ago. Factor in the new sub guild and revamped ESG, and its even less possible now. Keeping the existing guilds and ADDING the sub guilds I suspect, would have met near unanimous support I'm betting. This however, is already demonstrating that its upset/alienated a lot of players, and did so without so much as a warning.
I like the change, it makes sense for a low fantasy setting for the magick to be less. At first there will be more magicker roles being played but after the novelty wears off, I think it'll slow down.
I will miss the elementalist guilds that were removed. While I think the shadow and lightning elementalist abilities could be merged into the other elementalist guilds, think the nilazi elementalists guild could easily be made into several subguild aspects. I'm wondering if it was a design/playability decision not to have nilazi or if it was a thematic decision.
I like the nilazi guild and will miss it.
Unless they add a Fuck-Magick subguild I don't see much point in taking a mundane sub on a warrior anymore.
Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 21, 2016, 06:54:02 PM
Can't you just let me worship Khorne in game and grant some magickal immunity or something.
Also the "you" was not you, Rath. Just in case you thought it was. Sorry.
I approve.
Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 21, 2016, 08:12:47 PM
Fuck it
Change objective: BLOOD FOR THE BLOOD GOD
Also, this.
I think it's a legitimate concern that magick might get out of hand, unbalancing the game world. However I'm not that concerned because of the various social stigmas that make playing a magicker an isolated role. I don't see playing a caster being any less isolated. They will be more viable options as to the places they can play, go and do, with less visibility and more suitability, they'll still have to be either secret or gemmed with the limiting restrictions that come with each.
Quote from: Kryos on March 21, 2016, 09:06:07 PM
Quote from: Asmoth on March 21, 2016, 09:00:48 PM
Guys, look at it from this perspective.
It is what it is.
You can't change it, you just have to live in the world with it.
I personally would have LOVED to play a Nilaz, but eh, shit happens.
I also personally would have LOVED to play a full sorcerer. But shit happens like a year ago or whenever that happened.
Look for the positives and not the negatives. You literally went from WATER, STONE, LIGHTNING, SHADOWS, VOID, FIRE AND WIND. -only, with the chance of some shitty half assed subguild options-.
To literally massive combinations of abilities and talents.
If you look at it at it's basest number, that's 6x4=24 options, then you add in the differences that can be had and you're at petty staggering numbers of potential combos. WAY less chance of two mages being cookie cutter.
The problem here being, with the existence of ESG, cookie cutter went out the window a long time ago. Factor in the new sub guild and revamped ESG, and its even less possible now. Keeping the existing guilds and ADDING the sub guilds I suspect, would have met near unanimous support I'm betting. This however, is already demonstrating that its upset/alienated a lot of players, and did so without so much as a warning.
im not suprised a lot of players are upset, but we also have to remember that this is the first part of a complete overhaul of all the guilds, theres parts of this i absoutely love, and parts of it I dont like.
I think a lot of you people should stop looking at the viablity of what this or that is, or how OP this or that is, and looking at theme and RP, and focusing on making fun, believable characters that can bring the rp to life with these new character opportunites.
I think thats what these changes are going to be about, making the guild/sub guild have a lot of thematic weight to it.
Its going to be a bumpy ride, and so far, personally, im excited to see what else comes.
When I think on it, it would of been just as good to actually keep the main magick guilds. Or make them their own subguild.
Anyone with enough karma can be trusted to play those roles. Good points Lizzie.
And true, Kryos. Warning would of been nice.
I support the tribe mentality.
(Also, Blood for the blood god! - I thought I was the only one who shouted this!)
One step forward with the elementalists subguilds, seven steps back by amputating seven entire guilds from the game.
I wrote a lot more, but decided it wasn't worth investing too much energy in this. FantasyWriter's post resonated strongly with me.
We'll see how things play out. But my current emotion is disappointment, and a feeling of loss as a player.
I think I said a while ago something like "Make magick subguild" or some shit and all the replies were "But warrior/-insert any magick class here"
I predicted this.
Am I a wizard
Quote from: Rokal on March 21, 2016, 09:19:07 PM
I think a lot of you people should stop looking at the viablity of what this or that is, or how OP this or that is, and looking at theme and RP, and focusing on making fun, believable characters that can bring the rp to life with these new character opportunites.
I think thats what these changes are going to be about, making the guild/sub guild have a lot of thematic weight to it.
Its going to be a bumpy ride, and so far, personally, im excited to see what else comes.
Personally I find magick to be a garbage theme, with my one consolation being it had some serious coded and social disadvantages.
The code disadvantages have been lessened. If enough magicker PCs enter the game, the social disadvantages will begin to degrade as well.
Stand firm, sponsored leadership roles. Suffer not the witch to be in your clan.
Quote from: LauraMars on March 21, 2016, 09:05:26 PM
guys just wait, this isn't even our final form
Statements like that frighten me more than settle me down, when things move in this direction.
People keep saying 'Oh, there will be a bunch at first, but it will settle down.' Historically speaking, that's not...really the case. They'll likely try each one, which is where you think it'll settle down? No 'Try that again' mentality, you think?
The moment that people start getting denied because 'Sorry, there are too many magickal characters currently in the game' is where you'll know something bad was done. There is pretty much no incentive to go purely mundane.
QuoteHowever, the idea of these roles having a "cost" to playing them is accurate in one sense. By picking a magicker guild, you're giving up a way your character could be versatile in another manner. Bearing in mind that no guild is completely good at everything, any guild+magicker_subguild combination is going to have weaknesses. That will at least partly blunt the concern of magickers becoming overpowered, and will be addressed further during the guild revamp.
Weaknesses in what way? Because I'm guessing that exploiting said weaknesses will get you slapped with bad notes for abusing knowledge of the game, and the promise of weaknesses to them points out the weaknesses of the mundane more than it did before: A true mundane is now truly at a disadvantage, aside from the versatility of making their own crafts. There is magick in place to do pretty much any ESG better, which makes the subguild combinations very heavily weighted, as far as advantage, towards the magickal. Likewise, there is the promise of monitoring the play 'like a hawk' to make sure this goes well...the monitoring going on as is isn't that great, but we're being told to settle down because of the pledge of -more- attention on it, when attention seems to already be spread thin as it is.
I'm a little confused at what the -actual- accomplishment made here was. Make magick ambush us harder, when it was one of the more controversial items on whether players wanted it or didn't?
Edit: Holy shit, 7 replies I haven't read yet.
Quote from: KryosKeeping the existing guilds and ADDING the sub guilds I suspect, would have met near unanimous support I'm betting. This however, is already demonstrating that its upset/alienated a lot of players, and did so without so much as a warning.
Perhaps, but if we avoided doing things out of fear of alienating the playerbase then we would stop doing things. Instead, we saw a problem - magicker guilds weren't fully people, lacking a basic set of mundane skills that would be realistic for them to have, and the newer elements were relatively messily thrown together - and sought to correct it completely instead of getting it done halfway. A warning for a change of this nature would've caused people to apply for main-guild magickers before they were no longer available, and then we'd be forced to store everyone. We sought a way to place this change into the game more gradually.
So I guess the only things that make me scratch my head so far (now that I've had a chance to sit down and review everything) are the inability to craft things as a mage without going full merchant/mage. I liked the mage/crafting subguild thing. But I guess that'll probably be addressed in future updates to guilds.
And nilazi, well, I don't actually care they're gone too much. I always found the skulls'n'blood'n'Nine Inch Nails place those roles tended to wind up to be impossible to take seriously (no offense to anyone that's ever played a Nilazi, I'm sure YOU were the exception ;) ). BUT I did like them for their elemental-neutralizing skillset. Again, I guess we'll see if that comes back in some form later on.
As they said. They are gonna be watching it like a hawk, to make sure that people aren't going apeshit and upsetting the balance of the world.
I doubt they are going to allow someone to walk in and start killing templars willy nilly with their ungemmed warrior/krathi.
(Though I do sorta wish they would die so I could Role App one).
If anything the people who twink out or go apeshit and do something game breaking, are going to be perfect for the game, because the staff will be able to twink skillsets, starting skills, skillmaxes and all sorts of things to make it less abusable.
Quote from: Nergal on March 21, 2016, 09:22:58 PM
Quote from: KryosKeeping the existing guilds and ADDING the sub guilds I suspect, would have met near unanimous support I'm betting. This however, is already demonstrating that its upset/alienated a lot of players, and did so without so much as a warning.
Perhaps, but if we avoided doing things out of fear of alienating the playerbase then we would stop doing things. Instead, we saw a problem - magicker guilds weren't fully people, lacking a basic set of mundane skills that would be realistic for them to have, and the newer elements were relatively messily thrown together - and sought to correct it completely instead of getting it done halfway. A warning for a change of this nature would've caused people to apply for main-guild magickers before they were no longer available, and then we'd be forced to store everyone. We sought a way to place this change into the game more gradually.
I do appreciate Staff not deciding to immediately store or change any PCs in light of this change. Thanks!
Quote from: Asmoth on March 21, 2016, 09:00:48 PM
Guys, look at it from this perspective.
It is what it is.
You can't change it, you just have to live in the world with it.
I personally would have LOVED to play a Nilaz, but eh, shit happens.
I also personally would have LOVED to play a full sorcerer. But shit happens like a year ago or whenever that happened.
Look for the positives and not the negatives. You literally went from WATER, STONE, LIGHTNING, SHADOWS, VOID, FIRE AND WIND. -only, with the chance of some shitty half assed subguild options-.
To literally massive combinations of abilities and talents.
If you look at it at it's basest number, that's 6x4=24 options, then you add in the differences that can be had and you're at petty staggering numbers of potential combos. WAY less chance of two mages being cookie cutter.
You are failing to take into account that some players LOVE playing rangers as they they have been for years. Some people LOVE playing Merchants as they are as they have been for years. Some people LOVE playing Warriors as they have been for years. AND some people LOVE playing Magickers as they have been for years.
Hypothetically: How are Warrior players going to react to having to choose between being weapons masters and brawling (kick, bash, subdue,e etc.) masters? Or rangers can't have the ability to survive in the wild (desert quit/forage food) AND be able to be master trappers (archery/skin/tan). Merchants may now only have these two crafting banches, or those two crafting branches? Because as said before, no one masters everything.
The back-to-front and twisted nature of nilaz was actually a very, very interesting concept to explore in game. I really can't go into much more detail than that, but the skulls'n'blood stuff was honestly the smaller part of it, and just sort of matter of fact and par for the course, which was part of the fun of playing the guild. You saw death very differently.
I never got to play one, but I got to interact heavily with a brilliantly played one, and got to explore the theme of nilaz in other ways, and man.... I'm gonna miss it.
Goddamnit.
Quote from: FantasyWriter on March 21, 2016, 09:25:36 PM
You are failing to take into account that some players LOVE playing rangers as they they have been for years. Some people LOVE playing Merchants as they are as they have been for years. Some people LOVE playing Warriors as they have been for years. AND some people LOVE playing Magickers as they have been for years.
Hypothetically: How are Warrior players going to react to having to choose between being weapons masters and brawling (kick, bash, subdue,e etc.) masters? Or rangers can't have the ability to survive in the wild (desert quit/forage food) AND be able to be master trappers (archery/skin/tan). Merchants may now only have these two crafting banches, or those two crafting branches? Because as said before, no one masters everything.
Wait what? I played a merchant a few years ago and I was a master of a SHITLOAD of stuff.
None of it had to do with my subguild. Or has that changed and I just didn't notice because I don't Merchant much.
Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 21, 2016, 09:22:14 PM
Quote from: Rokal on March 21, 2016, 09:19:07 PM
I think a lot of you people should stop looking at the viablity of what this or that is, or how OP this or that is, and looking at theme and RP, and focusing on making fun, believable characters that can bring the rp to life with these new character opportunites.
I think thats what these changes are going to be about, making the guild/sub guild have a lot of thematic weight to it.
Its going to be a bumpy ride, and so far, personally, im excited to see what else comes.
Personally I find magick to be a garbage theme, with my one consolation being it had some serious coded and social disadvantages.
The code disadvantages have been lessened. If enough magicker PCs enter the game, the social disadvantages will begin to degrade as well.
Stand firm, sponsored leadership roles. Suffer not the witch to be in your clan.
This whole concept of 'if enough PC magickers enter the game' the social disadvantages will be gin to degrade as we'', seems so.. im sorry, but BS.
Compared to the world of zalanthas, the player characters are a SMALL PERCENTAGE(like, not evne one percent) of inhabitants of the known, just because you interact with PCs most of the time during your play time doesn't mean your character is interacting primarily with them - characters have familys, other minions to order around , vnpcs to interact with when off screen (logged out)
Its just matter of RPing upon the fact that gickery is rare and not allowing one to relax into it being common place.
im a huge fan of magick, and I support the fear and hatred for it, and i'll personally get on the case of anyone who starts treating it as the 'common' thing.
The social disadvantages become nothing if the player base lets that happen - and then, the virtual world will kick in and knock people back in its place, as it should be.
Just my thoughts on this.
Quote from: FantasyWriter on March 21, 2016, 09:25:36 PM
AND some people LOVE playing Magickers as they have been for years.
That's me. I loved playing them. And the fact that I now have to use the past tense is really depressing to me. I'm sure I'm not alone.
Quote from: Nergal on March 21, 2016, 09:22:58 PM
Quote from: KryosKeeping the existing guilds and ADDING the sub guilds I suspect, would have met near unanimous support I'm betting. This however, is already demonstrating that its upset/alienated a lot of players, and did so without so much as a warning.
Perhaps, but if we avoided doing things out of fear of alienating the playerbase then we would stop doing things. Instead, we saw a problem - magicker guilds weren't fully people, lacking a basic set of mundane skills that would be realistic for them to have, and the newer elements were relatively messily thrown together - and sought to correct it completely instead of getting it done halfway. A warning for a change of this nature would've caused people to apply for main-guild magickers before they were no longer available, and then we'd be forced to store everyone. We sought a way to place this change into the game more gradually.
I personally think this may have been better solved by having magick guilds able to have extended subguilds.
Quote from: wizturbo on March 21, 2016, 09:29:52 PM
Quote from: FantasyWriter on March 21, 2016, 09:25:36 PM
AND some people LOVE playing Magickers as they have been for years.
That's me. I loved playing them. And the fact that I now have to use the past tense is really depressing to me. I'm sure I'm not alone.
I'm with you. I tend to switch between mage/mundane/mage/mundane.
Quote from: Armaddict on March 21, 2016, 09:22:30 PM
QuoteHowever, the idea of these roles having a "cost" to playing them is accurate in one sense. By picking a magicker guild, you're giving up a way your character could be versatile in another manner. Bearing in mind that no guild is completely good at everything, any guild+magicker_subguild combination is going to have weaknesses. That will at least partly blunt the concern of magickers becoming overpowered, and will be addressed further during the guild revamp.
Weaknesses in what way? Because I'm guessing that exploiting said weaknesses will get you slapped with bad notes for abusing knowledge of the game, and the promise of weaknesses to them points out the weaknesses of the mundane more than it did before: A true mundane is now truly at a disadvantage, aside from the versatility of making their own crafts. There is magick in place to do pretty much any ESG better, which makes the subguild combinations very heavily weighted, as far as advantage, towards the magickal. Likewise, there is the promise of monitoring the play 'like a hawk' to make sure this goes well...the monitoring going on as is isn't that great, but we're being told to settle down because of the pledge of -more- attention on it, when attention seems to already be spread thin as it is.
I'm a little confused at what the -actual- accomplishment made here was. Make magick ambush us harder, when it was one of the more controversial items on whether players wanted it or didn't?
Edit: Holy shit, 7 replies I haven't read yet.
A warrior that takes a magick subguild isn't going to be able to:
- ride hands-free or trample anything
- have direction sense
- craft anything beyond cooking
- use stealth skills
- scan
- backstab or sap
- and more...
Whereas a warrior that takes a mundane subguild will be able to do one or more of these things. There are similar issues with picking a guild + a magick subguild. There is a trade-off in ways that there wasn't previously. And yet the power of a magicker is still maintained. Each aspect was designed with a theme in mind as well as playability. Yes, magickers are powerful, but fully mundane characters are still going to be desirable to play in their own right.
Quote from: Delirium on March 21, 2016, 09:27:28 PM
The back-to-front and twisted nature of nilaz was actually a very, very interesting concept to explore in game. I really can't go into much more detail than that, but the skulls'n'blood stuff was honestly the smaller part of it, and just sort of matter of fact and par for the course, which was part of the fun of playing the guild. You saw death very differently.
I never got to play one, but I got to interact heavily with a brilliantly played one, and got to explore the theme of nilaz in other ways, and man.... I'm gonna miss it.
I too was personally looking forward to one day playing a nilazi, and im sad that probably won't happen now.
You saying this makes me wish I had the chance even more. :<
QuoteStand firm, sponsored leadership roles. Suffer not the witch to be in your clan.
This is super important. Never forget the days when all documentation was ignored to have so much supernatural shit in one clan it literally demanded a nerf...-after- a not-small-amount-of-people lost their pc's to it.
Quote from: Rokal on March 21, 2016, 09:28:50 PM
The social disadvantages become nothing if the player base lets that happen - and then, the virtual world will kick in and knock people back in its place, as it should be.
Just my thoughts on this.
The playerbase as a population is weak, and will take the easy road. Consorting and "growing" to accept magickers is the easy road. It happens now, it will happen more.
It will be up to the sponsored roles and other leadership PCs in the game to set the tone, and... eh.
People play to win as often as not. And magick lets you win very easily.
Every clan's going to have a pet magicker or two soon enough, with no good way to counter them except more magickers. Or rangers. Who are also magickers.
Quote from: Nergal on March 21, 2016, 09:30:47 PM
Quote from: Armaddict on March 21, 2016, 09:22:30 PM
QuoteHowever, the idea of these roles having a "cost" to playing them is accurate in one sense. By picking a magicker guild, you're giving up a way your character could be versatile in another manner. Bearing in mind that no guild is completely good at everything, any guild+magicker_subguild combination is going to have weaknesses. That will at least partly blunt the concern of magickers becoming overpowered, and will be addressed further during the guild revamp.
Weaknesses in what way? Because I'm guessing that exploiting said weaknesses will get you slapped with bad notes for abusing knowledge of the game, and the promise of weaknesses to them points out the weaknesses of the mundane more than it did before: A true mundane is now truly at a disadvantage, aside from the versatility of making their own crafts. There is magick in place to do pretty much any ESG better, which makes the subguild combinations very heavily weighted, as far as advantage, towards the magickal. Likewise, there is the promise of monitoring the play 'like a hawk' to make sure this goes well...the monitoring going on as is isn't that great, but we're being told to settle down because of the pledge of -more- attention on it, when attention seems to already be spread thin as it is.
I'm a little confused at what the -actual- accomplishment made here was. Make magick ambush us harder, when it was one of the more controversial items on whether players wanted it or didn't?
Edit: Holy shit, 7 replies I haven't read yet.
A warrior that takes a magick subguild isn't going to be able to:
- ride hands-free or trample anything
- have direction sense
- craft anything beyond cooking
- use stealth skills
- scan
- backstab or sap
- and more...
Whereas a warrior that takes a mundane subguild will be able to do one or more of these things. There are similar issues with picking a guild + a magick subguild. There is a trade-off in ways that there wasn't previously. And yet the power of a magicker is still maintained. Each aspect was designed with a theme in mind as well as playability. Yes, magickers are powerful, but fully mundane characters are still going to be desirable to play in their own right.
A warrior can now:
-levitate
-relocate
-be hidden more reliably without care of encumbrance
-pull people to them who are hidden
-and more...
Your point?
Quote from: Nergal on March 21, 2016, 09:22:58 PM
Quote from: KryosKeeping the existing guilds and ADDING the sub guilds I suspect, would have met near unanimous support I'm betting. This however, is already demonstrating that its upset/alienated a lot of players, and did so without so much as a warning.
Perhaps, but if we avoided doing things out of fear of alienating the playerbase then we would stop doing things. Instead, we saw a problem - magicker guilds weren't fully people, lacking a basic set of mundane skills that would be realistic for them to have, and the newer elements were relatively messily thrown together - and sought to correct it completely instead of getting it done halfway. A warning for a change of this nature would've caused people to apply for main-guild magickers before they were no longer available, and then we'd be forced to store everyone. We sought a way to place this change into the game more gradually.
My magickers have always been fully people. I've always roleplayed them that way. I almost resent that you think otherwise. It means I've failed in my roleplay, catastrophically. Magicker GUILDS aren't people at all. They are tools in a roleplayer's toolbox. Nothing more or less. But now you've decreed that we're not allowed to have one toolbox with all our tools nice and neat. We now have to have a few dozen toolboxes - and we're only allowed to use one per character.
I really wish you would have started with a couple of very basic questions to the playerbase, that wouldn't have tipped anyone off about anything: "Do you consider playing magick roles to be playing full people, and if not, does it bother you that the answer is no?"
If a bunch of mage-playing players weren't complaining that magickers aren't fully people, then the "magickers aren't fully people" isn't a problem. It's nothing that's broken, and nothing that needs to be fixed.
I had 1 elementalist with an ext sub approved, and 2 spec apps. Bye bye interesting roles.
QuoteIf a bunch of mage-playing players weren't complaining that magickers aren't fully people, then the "magickers aren't fully people" isn't a problem. It's nothing that's broken, and nothing that needs to be fixed.
Seriously. The solution to 'people playing mages as not real people' was to...this?!
Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 21, 2016, 09:32:43 PM
Quote from: Rokal on March 21, 2016, 09:28:50 PM
The social disadvantages become nothing if the player base lets that happen - and then, the virtual world will kick in and knock people back in its place, as it should be.
Just my thoughts on this.
The playerbase as a population is weak, and will take the easy road. Consorting and "growing" to accept magickers is the easy road. It happens now, it will happen more.
It will be up to the sponsored roles and other leadership PCs in the game to set the tone, and... eh.
People play to win as often as not. And magick lets you win very easily.
Every clan's going to have a pet magicker or two soon enough, with no good way to counter them except more magickers. Or rangers. Who are also magickers.
That sort of negative mindset no offense, contributes to it. (And apologizes if I misread your meaning!)
I'd rather stop saying whats wrong and do everything to encourage people to do the good things.
but eh ,agree to disagree.
Everyone is totally going at this like this:
(http://www.quickmeme.com/img/6b/6b293f0462c2200ed471238f93f8104d8ec3eb9eebe8e45e74c073b78d862836.jpg)
Instead of actually giving it a chance.
Ranger with flight. Weeeeee.
Quote from: Armaddict on March 21, 2016, 09:33:43 PM
A warrior can now:
-levitate
-relocate
-be hidden more reliably without care of encumbrance
-pull people to them who are hidden
-and more...
Your point?
I think my point is fairly clear: that players can choose between a well-rounded set of mundane skills or take a few magicker skills along with a slightly smaller set of mundane skills and still achieve a character that fits into the world and does what they want it to do.
Quote from: Asmoth on March 21, 2016, 09:36:37 PM
Everyone is totally going at this like this:
(http://www.quickmeme.com/img/6b/6b293f0462c2200ed471238f93f8104d8ec3eb9eebe8e45e74c073b78d862836.jpg)
Instead of actually giving it a chance.
Yeah. Pretty much, that's what happens when what we will refer to as a ruling class makes a decision that no one sees as a benefit to any party they're interested in. Mix in some unrealistic promises made, and things get pretty irritating.
I like how the change reflects the "low fantasy" nature of the game world. Rather than having elementalism defining a character, it's more of a flavor while allowing people to have effective abilities in other areas. Though it'd be cool if primary guild elementalists were still available through special application, similarly to how extended subguilds have previously been handled.
Quote from: Armaddict on March 21, 2016, 09:35:05 PM
QuoteIf a bunch of mage-playing players weren't complaining that magickers aren't fully people, then the "magickers aren't fully people" isn't a problem. It's nothing that's broken, and nothing that needs to be fixed.
Seriously. The solution to 'people playing mages as not real people' was to...this?!
Yeah, reading those type comments from staff, really hurt me in the feels.
Quote from: Nergal on March 21, 2016, 09:39:13 PM
Quote from: Armaddict on March 21, 2016, 09:33:43 PM
A warrior can now:
-levitate
-relocate
-be hidden more reliably without care of encumbrance
-pull people to them who are hidden
-and more...
Your point?
I think my point is fairly clear: that players can choose between a well-rounded set of mundane skills or take a few magicker skills along with a slightly smaller set of mundane skills and still achieve a character that fits into the world and does what they want it to do.
Your point is to reiterate mine. There is no reason to choose the purely mundane, because more drastic benefit comes from the magickal, unless you are wanting to craft. That is unless the entire game becomes based on witch hunting.
Those are some pretty specific detailings of a magicker's capabalities, Armaddict. But I guess obfuscation of a magicker's ability for the purpose of finding out IG went out the window when a bunch of people decided to make a subculture around how much they hate a game other people enjoy and I'm really too annoyed to clearly state wherever I was going with this. I like the change that allows mundane capabilities with magicker features to introduce magickers as more than just spellslingers, but I am not pleased that magickers as they were have been removed.
Quote from: Lizzie on March 21, 2016, 09:33:54 PM
Quote from: Nergal on March 21, 2016, 09:22:58 PM
Quote from: KryosKeeping the existing guilds and ADDING the sub guilds I suspect, would have met near unanimous support I'm betting. This however, is already demonstrating that its upset/alienated a lot of players, and did so without so much as a warning.
Perhaps, but if we avoided doing things out of fear of alienating the playerbase then we would stop doing things. Instead, we saw a problem - magicker guilds weren't fully people, lacking a basic set of mundane skills that would be realistic for them to have, and the newer elements were relatively messily thrown together - and sought to correct it completely instead of getting it done halfway. A warning for a change of this nature would've caused people to apply for main-guild magickers before they were no longer available, and then we'd be forced to store everyone. We sought a way to place this change into the game more gradually.
My magickers have always been fully people. I've always roleplayed them that way. I almost resent that you think otherwise. It means I've failed in my roleplay, catastrophically. Magicker GUILDS aren't people at all. They are tools in a roleplayer's toolbox. Nothing more or less. But now you've decreed that we're not allowed to have one toolbox with all our tools nice and neat. We now have to have a few dozen toolboxes - and we're only allowed to use one per character.
I really wish you would have started with a couple of very basic questions to the playerbase, that wouldn't have tipped anyone off about anything: "Do you consider playing magick roles to be playing full people, and if not, does it bother you that the answer is no?"
If a bunch of mage-playing players weren't complaining that magickers aren't fully people, then the "magickers aren't fully people" isn't a problem. It's nothing that's broken, and nothing that needs to be fixed.
Quote from: Armaddict on March 21, 2016, 09:35:05 PM
QuoteIf a bunch of mage-playing players weren't complaining that magickers aren't fully people, then the "magickers aren't fully people" isn't a problem. It's nothing that's broken, and nothing that needs to be fixed.
Seriously. The solution to 'people playing mages as not real people' was to...this?!
Quote from: FantasyWriter on March 21, 2016, 09:40:13 PM
Quote from: Armaddict on March 21, 2016, 09:35:05 PM
QuoteIf a bunch of mage-playing players weren't complaining that magickers aren't fully people, then the "magickers aren't fully people" isn't a problem. It's nothing that's broken, and nothing that needs to be fixed.
Seriously. The solution to 'people playing mages as not real people' was to...this?!
Yeah, reading those type comments from staff, really hurt me in the feels.
But that's not what I said. I didn't say anything at all about how magickers were being played. I said the guilds themselves were lacking. Each magicker guild was a tree of spells + contact, barrier, and cooking. We didn't feel that accurately reflected the extent of what a Zalanthan was capable of doing or learning. We didn't feel that manifestation thematically meant that a Zalanthan lost almost all ability to do "mundane things".
Hey, Nergal.
I am in no way hurrying you. But I currently have no character and I'm not really in a "greaaat" hurry to make one. Still struggling with a concept to make one and busy irl. So I got a question. Any 'looose' idea when will the subguild revamp as whole be complete? What I'm asking is if it'll take say ... a month. I'll probably wait for it. But if it can easily be half a year before the rest of it comes out, I'll probably create some throwaway meanwhile.
Quote from: Nergal on March 21, 2016, 09:39:13 PM
Quote from: Armaddict on March 21, 2016, 09:33:43 PM
A warrior can now:
-levitate
-relocate
-be hidden more reliably without care of encumbrance
-pull people to them who are hidden
-and more...
Your point?
I think my point is fairly clear: that players can choose between a well-rounded set of mundane skills or take a few magicker skills along with a slightly smaller set of mundane skills and still achieve a character that fits into the world and does what they want it to do.
THIS!
Do you want to play a game where everyone has the option to be what they want to be. Or a game that never changes, and you have to learn every mechanic and every way to skillup your onehand skill till you unlock razors or whatever?
Think about this, there are people who have wanted this change for a while, but they have endured playing in a game world where they had to be a mundane and strong and combaty, or a mage and be immensely powerful, unless they got jumped...
Let people play the game they want to, and you play the game you want to. If you wanna play a warrior with every character and your sole goal is to branch pitchforks or whatever the elite weapons are, do it. But stop shitting on everyone elses parade just because they may knock you off the top of the mountain of PVP Elitism.
I've spotted a basic trend when reading threads like these.
First page filled with amazing feedback, people shitting the bed with excitement.
Subsequent pages filled with people shitting the bed with rage after actually reading the announcement again.
Don't worry BadSkeelz, at least we know there will still be one group of people that can't be gicks. I'll see you in the Mul Outpost my friend!
I'm not annoyed about the change, mind, I'm annoyed for different reasons. I missed a bus and had to walk five miles and a bunch of other things, but I still am not wholly supportive of every aspect of the change.
Quote from: dravage on March 21, 2016, 09:43:37 PM
I've spotted a basic trend when reading threads like these.
First page filled with amazing feedback, people shitting the bed with excitement.
Subsequent pages filled with people shitting the bed with rage after actually reading the announcement again.
Welcome to the GDB, dravage. Try not to read it too much.
Quote from: Iiyola on March 21, 2016, 09:34:15 PM
I had 1 elementalist with an ext sub approved, and 2 spec apps. Bye bye interesting roles.
That's....probably a knee jerk response to something that has shocked you. But if you think you can no longer play interesting roles because some skills got moved around, I'm not sure what to say. Skills are cool, but they are only a small fraction of what makes an interesting role or character interesting.
Some of the most dull and uninteresting characters I've encountered have been fully maxed sorcerers and mages. Some of the most interesting roles I've seen have used a bare minimum of whatever their skills were (to this day I still don't know what guilds most of my favorite characters have been, because their characters were so strong and so fully realized and so awesome it overshadowed everything else.)
There's nothing wrong with using skills, or wanting certain skills, or being powerful and strong in the code. But geez, the thought that an "interesting character" relies on a skill sheet and without that specific skill sheet you have nothing just really gets my goat.
wow, what is this, why am I posting so seriously about this? is this passion? what's going on inside of me
Quote from: LauraMars on March 21, 2016, 09:44:52 PM
Quote from: Iiyola on March 21, 2016, 09:34:15 PM
I had 1 elementalist with an ext sub approved, and 2 spec apps. Bye bye interesting roles.
That's....probably a knee jerk response to something that has shocked you. But if you think you can no longer play interesting roles because some skills got moved around, I'm not sure what to say. Skills are cool, but they are only a small fraction of what makes an interesting role or character interesting.
Some of the most dull and uninteresting characters I've encountered have been fully maxed sorcerers and mages. Some of the most interesting roles I've seen have used a bare minimum of whatever their skills were.
There's nothing wrong with using skills, or wanting certain skills, or being powerful and strong in the code. But geez, the thought that an "interesting character" relies on a skill sheet and without that specific skill sheet you have nothing just really gets my goat.
wow, what is this, why am I posting so seriously about this? is this passion? what's going on inside of me
I have no idea, I too have been avoiding going to dinner simply to interject in this thread.
I feel a need to defend this change, why? I have no idea, I am currently in a character that's probably going no where fast, but I just feel the need to defend it.
I should just go get dinner.
Quote from: Armaddict on March 21, 2016, 09:40:47 PM
Quote from: Nergal on March 21, 2016, 09:39:13 PM
Quote from: Armaddict on March 21, 2016, 09:33:43 PM
A warrior can now:
-levitate
-relocate
-be hidden more reliably without care of encumbrance
-pull people to them who are hidden
-and more...
Your point?
I think my point is fairly clear: that players can choose between a well-rounded set of mundane skills or take a few magicker skills along with a slightly smaller set of mundane skills and still achieve a character that fits into the world and does what they want it to do.
Your point is to reiterate mine. There is no reason to choose the purely mundane, because more drastic benefit comes from the magickal, unless you are wanting to craft. That is unless the entire game becomes based on witch hunting.
What makes magick-casting more drastically beneficial than a solid set of mundane abilities? Only if you're treating magick purely as a way to increase your character's power would you come to a conclusion like that. Bear in mind that playing a magicker in general comes with severe inherent disadvantages.
Quote from: wizturbo on March 21, 2016, 09:29:52 PM
Quote from: FantasyWriter on March 21, 2016, 09:25:36 PM
AND some people LOVE playing Magickers as they have been for years.
That's me. I loved playing them. And the fact that I now have to use the past tense is really depressing to me. I'm sure I'm not alone.
Totally not alone. I have zero interest in playing a character that starts out right out of the box, completely incapable, with zero capacity, to ever become a full-fledged elementalist with everything that goes with it.
I hope no one minds, but I added a poll to gauge the reaction of these changes. I tried to make it as unbiased as possible, because I want the staff to have actionable data to work with.
Quote from: Dar on March 21, 2016, 09:42:18 PM
Hey, Nergal.
I am in no way hurrying you. But I currently have no character and I'm not really in a "greaaat" hurry to make one. Still struggling with a concept to make one and busy irl. So I got a question. Any 'looose' idea when will the subguild revamp as whole be complete? What I'm asking is if it'll take say ... a month. I'll probably wait for it. But if it can easily be half a year before the rest of it comes out, I'll probably create some throwaway meanwhile.
There's no timetable set. Bear in mind that guilds as a whole are getting revamped, not just subguilds. I would recommend playing a character in the meantime. I definitely encourage anyone to try out a magicker at least once before they knock the idea too severely.
Quote from: LauraMars on March 21, 2016, 09:44:52 PM
Quote from: Iiyola on March 21, 2016, 09:34:15 PM
I had 1 elementalist with an ext sub approved, and 2 spec apps. Bye bye interesting roles.
Skills are cool, but they are only a small fraction of what makes an interesting role or character interesting.
Really? Because the main reasons being stated for the change is to give magick users more "well rounded skills" using the justification that that will make them "real people."
If skills are only a small fraction of what makes an interesting character, why was this change needed?
Quote from: wizturbo on March 21, 2016, 09:48:03 PM
I hope no one minds, but I added a poll to gauge the reaction of these changes. I tried to make it as unbiased as possible, because I want the staff to have actionable data to work with.
Could have used a "too soon to tell" option.
I see pros and cons in this, but really don't know how it's going to pan out till I see it in action.
Like most changes to the game, I think it's going to follow a familiar trajectory
1) Announced changed
2) Page 1 excitement
2) Page 2 misgivings
3) Page 3-30 fear and loathing
4) After a month of play time, game continues as normal with no discernible negative effects from the change
Bogre's proposed karma fix: '
Karma 1 - Desert elf
Karma 2 - Vivaduan elementalist, Ruk elementalist, Viv-touched, Ruk-touched
Karma 3 - HG, Krath-touched, Whira-touched, Drov-touched, Ruk-Aspects, Viv-Aspects
Karma 4 - Drov elementalist, Krath elementalist, Whira elementalist, Krath-guile, Whira-tempest, Drov aspect
Karma 5 - Krath-agony, Whira-travel, Drov aspect, Nilaz-touched
Karma 6 - Nilaz elementalist,
Karma 7 - Mul, Nilaz aspects
Karma 8 - Sorc subs/Psion
Special app: * Full sorcerors
Then allow karma guild + karma subguild.
How many options is that to define a character? A ton. Does it allow you to play a buffed wreck ranger? Yes - but you might have to special app it or have enough karma to be trusted with it. And you still might be outclassed by a full, true elementalist.
Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 21, 2016, 09:51:47 PM
Quote from: wizturbo on March 21, 2016, 09:48:03 PM
I hope no one minds, but I added a poll to gauge the reaction of these changes. I tried to make it as unbiased as possible, because I want the staff to have actionable data to work with.
Could have used a "too soon to tell" option.
I see pros and cons in this, but really don't know how it's going to pan out till I see it in action.
Like most changes to the game, I think it's going to follow a familiar trajectory
1) Announced changed
2) Page 1 excitement
2) Page 2 misgivings
3) Page 3-30 fear and loathing
4) After a month of play time, game continues as normal with no discernible negative effects from the change
Because even if a vast majority of people dislike what has been done, there's only one option open to them to do anything about it: the nuclear option. A pretty poor setup.
Quote from: FantasyWriter on March 21, 2016, 09:51:09 PM
Quote from: LauraMars on March 21, 2016, 09:44:52 PM
Quote from: Iiyola on March 21, 2016, 09:34:15 PM
I had 1 elementalist with an ext sub approved, and 2 spec apps. Bye bye interesting roles.
Skills are cool, but they are only a small fraction of what makes an interesting role or character interesting.
Really? Because the main reasons being stated for the change is to give magick users more "well rounded skills" using the justification that that will make them "real people."
If skills are only a small fraction of what makes an interesting character, why was this change needed?
Skills are important for different reasons.
I wish my current magicker had combat skills for example, so I'm not fighting day in day out for masturbatory reasons.
I don't want to make him swordmaster or anything, but I do want to see advancement.
I think that's what they were aiming for, not so much that people who don't want to train, have to.
Quote from: FantasyWriter on March 21, 2016, 09:51:09 PM
Quote from: LauraMars on March 21, 2016, 09:44:52 PM
Quote from: Iiyola on March 21, 2016, 09:34:15 PM
I had 1 elementalist with an ext sub approved, and 2 spec apps. Bye bye interesting roles.
Skills are cool, but they are only a small fraction of what makes an interesting role or character interesting.
Really? Because the main reasons being stated for the change is to give magick users more "well rounded skills" using the justification that that will make them "real people."
If skills are only a small fraction of what makes an interesting character, why was this change needed?
I imagine it as theme, remember.. people had lives before they manifested their magick, this allows a player of a gick to have that option of experience of a life before gickery, its not about the coded -use- of the skills, but the thematic place of them.
That said, I don't like that the full elementalist guilds were removed - someone born into gickery from the day they could walk, having the gem from that age on, ect, and fully devoted to their element, is one such concept that now isnt really possible.
Quote from: Asmoth on March 21, 2016, 09:53:37 PM
Quote from: FantasyWriter on March 21, 2016, 09:51:09 PM
Quote from: LauraMars on March 21, 2016, 09:44:52 PM
Quote from: Iiyola on March 21, 2016, 09:34:15 PM
I had 1 elementalist with an ext sub approved, and 2 spec apps. Bye bye interesting roles.
Skills are cool, but they are only a small fraction of what makes an interesting role or character interesting.
Really? Because the main reasons being stated for the change is to give magick users more "well rounded skills" using the justification that that will make them "real people."
If skills are only a small fraction of what makes an interesting character, why was this change needed?
Skills are important for different reasons.
I wish my current magicker had combat skills for example, so I'm not fighting day in day out for masturbatory reasons.
I don't want to make him swordmaster or anything, but I do want to see advancement.
I think that's what they were aiming for, not so much that people who don't want to train, have to.
We had this already.... Krathi/Agressor.
Quote from: Asmoth on March 21, 2016, 09:53:37 PM
Quote from: FantasyWriter on March 21, 2016, 09:51:09 PM
Quote from: LauraMars on March 21, 2016, 09:44:52 PM
Quote from: Iiyola on March 21, 2016, 09:34:15 PM
I had 1 elementalist with an ext sub approved, and 2 spec apps. Bye bye interesting roles.
Skills are cool, but they are only a small fraction of what makes an interesting role or character interesting.
Really? Because the main reasons being stated for the change is to give magick users more "well rounded skills" using the justification that that will make them "real people."
If skills are only a small fraction of what makes an interesting character, why was this change needed?
Skills are important for different reasons.
I wish my current magicker had combat skills for example, so I'm not fighting day in day out for masturbatory reasons.
I don't want to make him swordmaster or anything, but I do want to see advancement.
I think that's what they were aiming for, not so much that people who don't want to train, have to.
Then you should've picked a combat-based extended subguild. But now, you can't do that anymore. You will not be allowed to play a magicker who can fight without magicks. You are required to only pick a fighter who can sling a few spells that fall into a very limited category, AND risk getting caught, gemmed, and/or executed for your trouble.
This actually makes some good sense. I mean ... now that magick is subguilded, a lot of extended subguilds are basically useless except very rare isntances that will mostly involve merchants. I seriously do not see "any" guild taking lancer/whatever other weapon skill subguilds there. A merchant might sort of go for them if their concept is specific. But in general? ... those extended subguilds were all ment to be for mages to round them out.
Quote from: Rokal on March 21, 2016, 09:53:40 PM
Quote from: FantasyWriter on March 21, 2016, 09:51:09 PM
Quote from: LauraMars on March 21, 2016, 09:44:52 PM
Quote from: Iiyola on March 21, 2016, 09:34:15 PM
I had 1 elementalist with an ext sub approved, and 2 spec apps. Bye bye interesting roles.
Skills are cool, but they are only a small fraction of what makes an interesting role or character interesting.
Really? Because the main reasons being stated for the change is to give magick users more "well rounded skills" using the justification that that will make them "real people."
If skills are only a small fraction of what makes an interesting character, why was this change needed?
I imagine it as theme, remember.. people had lives before they manifested their magick, this allows a player of a gick to have that option of experience of a life before gickery, its not about the coded -use- of the skills, but the thematic place of them.
That said, I don't like that the full elementalist guilds were removed - someone born into gickery from the day they could walk, having the gem from that age on, ect, and fully devoted to their element, is one such concept that now isnt really possible.
I would disagree, to a point.
It's still a totally doable role. The idea that it isn't is a stance taken from our experiences of having a "whole" magicker skill-set instead of a "quarter mage" skill set (or 1/3 mage, as was pointed out..I just thought "quarter mage" sounded better than "thirded mage"). Who says you have to play out the mundane skills? Your 'gicker just has only developed whatever magick skills the sub-guild gave, to this point in their life.
But on the other hand, I get what you're saying. While I am in agreement with the argument that a skill-set =/= a character...to a certain degree, yes it does. Capability is a large part of what makes a character and a large part of said character's characterization, and if your role was as a full-magicker..it now feels like the opposite of what the situation was, before. You were a sterotype, all magick, no mundane. Now, for a full-gicker, it's..2/3 mundane and 1/3 gicker.
I've had the afternoon and early evening to think about the changes. I share some of the concerns posted here. I'm particularly sad that Nilazi are being removed--though I've never played one or knowingly played with one. Losing drovians and elkrosians doesn't bother me much, particularly since drovian removal is a nice "buff" to mundane sneakies. Etc., etc. There's stuff to worry about, for sure.
BUT. I like the *motivations* behind these changes. Maybe the changes will work, maybe not. But the changes are being made for what strike me as good reasons. And while everyone is focusing on the removal of beloved options, I'm personally pleased to see how many OTHER options, roles, and personal plotlines have been added to the game. These changes aren't simply removal. They're also giving us something new. A burglar/viv. A ranger/enchanter. A pickpocket who leaps from building top to building top with a little bit of extra wind in her hair. I think there are many very rich possibilities that will emerge.
Side note: If the main guilds are getting an overhaul, I suspect that now is the time for everyone to fulfill their "classic Arm" pickpocket fantasies.
QuoteWhat makes magick-casting more drastically beneficial than a solid set of mundane abilities? Only if you're treating magick purely as a way to increase your character's power would you come to a conclusion like that. Bear in mind that playing a magicker in general comes with severe inherent disadvantages.
I'm a little appalled that you can ask that, given the various threads over the past decade or so discussing the whole magicker vs mundane situation and why people liked magick being put off to the side (and didn't like it, as well, but their argument consisted of having weaknesses that no longer exist), and knowing full well that for just about every skill in the game, there is a magickal spell that can be used in the same way, but better.
But I will wait. There seem to be some who are happy about how powerful they can get now, at least. Me? I'm just not looking forward to having to deal with magickal roleplay more often, nor the incoming tirades about gemmed employment now that they can do things, or...just about any of it. The more I think about it, the -less- I see to look forward to with it, not more.
I haven't read this whole thread but I'm so excited.
I won't be commenting on the actual changes until later when they have had time to settle.
However:
Staff, you forgot update the helpfiles for Elkrosian, Drovian, and Nilazi to show that they are no longer playable.
They still state what karma you need to play them.
Quote from: Dar on March 21, 2016, 09:58:53 PM
This actually makes some good sense. I mean ... now that magick is subguilded, a lot of extended subguilds are basically useless except very rare isntances that will mostly involve merchants. I seriously do not see "any" guild taking lancer/whatever other weapon skill subguilds there. A merchant might sort of go for them if their concept is specific. But in general? ... those extended subguilds were all ment to be for mages to round them out.
You're missing the fact that current "mundane guilds" are going going to get revamped, too.
You're most likely not going to be able to play what is now a full warrior/ranger/merchant AND a subguild.
Eventually you will be probably be picking between halves of different guilds with some overlap (that was the plan for Armageddon Reborn, if you recall).
Except that it is looking like it is going to turn into something more like two half mundane guilds or half a mundane guild with a smidgen of magick thrown in.
I think the fact that both pro- and anti-magick players are worried and concerned about this change is a sign that it's probably going to work.
"A good deal is one that leaves neither side happy" and whatnot.
Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 21, 2016, 10:03:56 PM
I think the fact that both pro- and anti-magick players are worried and concerned about this change is a sign that it's probably going to work.
"A good deal is one that leaves neither side happy" and whatnot.
+1
Quote from: Thunkkin on March 21, 2016, 09:59:30 PM
BUT. I like the *motivations* behind these changes.
Thank you for posting this! My initial reaction was one of "Cool!" then I spent time settling down and thought "..not so cool" and then transitioned into " ..I'm..concerned, now" and I couldn't figure out why.
This helped clarify my feelings. I applaud the motivation behind the changes, and I like that change is happening even if I am a bit upset about how some of it is implemented.
That said, I want to take this moment and say "Thank you, Staff" for the time and effort you put into Staffing this game and providing a place that people love enough to get passionate about.
Quote from: Armaddict on March 21, 2016, 10:02:25 PM
QuoteWhat makes magick-casting more drastically beneficial than a solid set of mundane abilities? Only if you're treating magick purely as a way to increase your character's power would you come to a conclusion like that. Bear in mind that playing a magicker in general comes with severe inherent disadvantages.
I'm a little appalled that you can ask that, given the various threads over the past decade or so discussing the whole magicker vs mundane situation and why people liked magick being put off to the side (and didn't like it, as well, but their argument consisted of having weaknesses that no longer exist), and knowing full well that for just about every skill in the game, there is a magickal spell that can be used in the same way, but better.
But I will wait. There seem to be some who are happy about how powerful they can get now, at least. Me? I'm just not looking forward to having to deal with magickal roleplay more often, nor the incoming tirades about gemmed employment now that they can do things, or...just about any of it. The more I think about it, the -less- I see to look forward to with it, not more.
You (and many players) don't have a complete understanding of how magick worked. Just because there are threads with players discussing things doesn't mean they are correct, or the threads particularly notable. Consider the possibility that staff with knowledge of the workings of magick and mundane skills did their best to make changes while maintaining the relationship that existed between magickal and mundane skills.
Quote from: Pale Horse on March 21, 2016, 09:59:08 PM
Quote from: Rokal on March 21, 2016, 09:53:40 PM
I imagine it as theme, remember.. people had lives before they manifested their magick, this allows a player of a gick to have that option of experience of a life before gickery, its not about the coded -use- of the skills, but the thematic place of them.
That said, I don't like that the full elementalist guilds were removed - someone born into gickery from the day they could walk, having the gem from that age on, ect, and fully devoted to their element, is one such concept that now isnt really possible.
I would disagree, to a point.
It's still a totally doable role. The idea that it isn't is a stance taken from our experiences of having a "whole" magicker skill-set instead of a "quarter mage" skill set (or 1/3 mage, as was pointed out..I just thought "quarter mage" sounded better than "thirded mage"). Who says you have to play out the mundane skills? Your 'gicker just has only developed whatever magick skills the sub-guild gave, to this point in their life.
But on the other hand, I get what you're saying. While I am in agreement with the argument that a skill-set =/= a character...to a certain degree, yes it does. Capability is a large part of what makes a character and a large part of said character's characterization, and if your role was as a full-magicker..it now feels like the opposite of what the situation was, before. You were a sterotype, all magick, no mundane. Now, for a full-gicker, it's..2/3 mundane and 1/3 gicker.
But for the purposes of the gameworld as the documentation stands right now...it doesn't matter what your skill sheet says, you're still ALL GICKER even if you do have max archery also.
For those who don't make skills a big focus of their play, this changes very little. For those who do, now they have other skills to use and play with while enjoying being a social pariah, instead of just spam casting in the desert or a temple and being a social pariah.
oh my god 8 new replies
Quote from: Dar on March 21, 2016, 09:58:53 PM
...those extended subguilds were all ment to be for mages to round them out.
*Very* useful for the less martial mundane guilds, too. Very, very.
Quote from: LauraMars on March 21, 2016, 10:06:33 PM
Quote from: Pale Horse on March 21, 2016, 09:59:08 PM
Quote from: Rokal on March 21, 2016, 09:53:40 PM
I imagine it as theme, remember.. people had lives before they manifested their magick, this allows a player of a gick to have that option of experience of a life before gickery, its not about the coded -use- of the skills, but the thematic place of them.
That said, I don't like that the full elementalist guilds were removed - someone born into gickery from the day they could walk, having the gem from that age on, ect, and fully devoted to their element, is one such concept that now isnt really possible.
I would disagree, to a point.
It's still a totally doable role. The idea that it isn't is a stance taken from our experiences of having a "whole" magicker skill-set instead of a "quarter mage" skill set (or 1/3 mage, as was pointed out..I just thought "quarter mage" sounded better than "thirded mage"). Who says you have to play out the mundane skills? Your 'gicker just has only developed whatever magick skills the sub-guild gave, to this point in their life.
But on the other hand, I get what you're saying. While I am in agreement with the argument that a skill-set =/= a character...to a certain degree, yes it does. Capability is a large part of what makes a character and a large part of said character's characterization, and if your role was as a full-magicker..it now feels like the opposite of what the situation was, before. You were a sterotype, all magick, no mundane. Now, for a full-gicker, it's..2/3 mundane and 1/3 gicker.
But for the purposes of the gameworld as the documentation stands right now...it doesn't matter what your skill sheet says, you're still ALL GICKER even if you do have max archery also.
For those who don't make skills a big focus of their play, this changes very little. For those who do, now they have other skills to use and play with while enjoying being a social pariah, instead of just spam casting in the desert or a temple and being a social pariah.
oh my god 8 new replies
Thanks laura, I was trying to find a good way to explain it but you nailed it right on :)
Quote from: Thunkkin on March 21, 2016, 10:07:36 PM
Quote from: Dar on March 21, 2016, 09:58:53 PM
...those extended subguilds were all ment to be for mages to round them out.
*Very* useful for the less martial mundane guilds, too. Very, very.
Give an example that's not merchant?
Quote from: Dar on March 21, 2016, 10:10:50 PM
Quote from: Thunkkin on March 21, 2016, 10:07:36 PM
Quote from: Dar on March 21, 2016, 09:58:53 PM
...those extended subguilds were all ment to be for mages to round them out.
*Very* useful for the less martial mundane guilds, too. Very, very.
Give an example that's not merchant?
Burglar aggressor for them sweet assassination scenes.
A raider?
Quote from: LauraMars on March 21, 2016, 10:06:33 PM
Quote from: Pale Horse on March 21, 2016, 09:59:08 PM
Quote from: Rokal on March 21, 2016, 09:53:40 PM
I imagine it as theme, remember.. people had lives before they manifested their magick, this allows a player of a gick to have that option of experience of a life before gickery, its not about the coded -use- of the skills, but the thematic place of them.
That said, I don't like that the full elementalist guilds were removed - someone born into gickery from the day they could walk, having the gem from that age on, ect, and fully devoted to their element, is one such concept that now isnt really possible.
I would disagree, to a point.
It's still a totally doable role. The idea that it isn't is a stance taken from our experiences of having a "whole" magicker skill-set instead of a "quarter mage" skill set (or 1/3 mage, as was pointed out..I just thought "quarter mage" sounded better than "thirded mage"). Who says you have to play out the mundane skills? Your 'gicker just has only developed whatever magick skills the sub-guild gave, to this point in their life.
But on the other hand, I get what you're saying. While I am in agreement with the argument that a skill-set =/= a character...to a certain degree, yes it does. Capability is a large part of what makes a character and a large part of said character's characterization, and if your role was as a full-magicker..it now feels like the opposite of what the situation was, before. You were a sterotype, all magick, no mundane. Now, for a full-gicker, it's..2/3 mundane and 1/3 gicker.
But for the purposes of the gameworld as the documentation stands right now...it doesn't matter what your skill sheet says, you're still ALL GICKER even if you do have max archery also.
For those who don't make skills a big focus of their play, this changes very little. For those who do, now they have other skills to use and play with while enjoying being a social pariah, instead of just spam casting in the desert or a temple and being a social pariah.
oh my god 8 new replies
That's another problem.
Before, the magickers were pretty inept as mundanes. Which allowed them to be all powerful and all. But actually rather inept when alone. Most elementalists could destroy small villages, but they still needed to eat, drink, and could not quit out in wildernesses. Which if rogue, allowed them to be trackable, findeable, ambushable, vulnerable. It also made them want to group up together for survival. Their mundane weakness noticeably set them aside. So much even that the only real mundane traits that they could've used to compete well amidst the mundanes without the use of magick, was their charisma and intelligence.
Now, they are literally not different in any way. While thematically this is very accurate. Afterall the curse of magick came randomly and just about "anybody" could turn out to be a gicker. Playwise though, it's very very ... freaking overpowered. The gickers lost all of their vulnerability. They think they're people now, see? The fact that they lost their subguilds is such a laughable small price. It doesnt even matter what spells they've got.
Quote from: Nergal on March 21, 2016, 10:06:07 PM
Quote from: Armaddict on March 21, 2016, 10:02:25 PM
QuoteWhat makes magick-casting more drastically beneficial than a solid set of mundane abilities? Only if you're treating magick purely as a way to increase your character's power would you come to a conclusion like that. Bear in mind that playing a magicker in general comes with severe inherent disadvantages.
I'm a little appalled that you can ask that, given the various threads over the past decade or so discussing the whole magicker vs mundane situation and why people liked magick being put off to the side (and didn't like it, as well, but their argument consisted of having weaknesses that no longer exist), and knowing full well that for just about every skill in the game, there is a magickal spell that can be used in the same way, but better.
But I will wait. There seem to be some who are happy about how powerful they can get now, at least. Me? I'm just not looking forward to having to deal with magickal roleplay more often, nor the incoming tirades about gemmed employment now that they can do things, or...just about any of it. The more I think about it, the -less- I see to look forward to with it, not more.
You (and many players) don't have a complete understanding of how magick worked. Just because there are threads with players discussing things doesn't mean they are correct, or the threads particularly notable. Consider the possibility that staff with knowledge of the workings of magick and mundane skills did their best to make changes while maintaining the relationship that existed between magickal and mundane skills.
...that's a complete cop out. I didn't say those threads were filled with exact information about what does what. I said that they pointed towards the clear idea that spells could make mundane skills very unnecessary. If you're going to argue about that, you can start spewing skills at me and I'll start spewing spells back at you. Inferring that I don't know some deep secret that actually makes spells -way weaker- than what I think is...really?
Likewise, consider that staff have indeed made poor judgments and decisions before, even with all this wisdom and knowledge and resources you've referenced. The whole reason players give you feedback is for your information to let you know when things are good or bad, but when you just toss them aside they do little good to anyone.
Quote from: Dar on March 21, 2016, 10:10:50 PM
Give an example that's not merchant?
It seems that people discuss skills in much more detail than they did a year ago when RL caused me to take a hiatus. But I'm still not sure how much I should discuss here. Suffice to say, weapon skills are very important if you engage in combat with other players, regardless of what weapon you use. Having additional weapon skills as well as disarm greatly effects certain guilds' performance in PVP.
I suspect getting that great wisdom roll is gonna be tougher than it used to be. Esp. if you want to focus strength for bludgeoning or whatever. Fewer extremely-good-wisdom-at-minimum mages.
Quote from: Dar on March 21, 2016, 10:20:30 PM
The gickers lost all of their vulnerability. They think they're people now, see? The fact that they lost their subguilds is such a laughable small price. It doesnt even matter what spells they've got.
There are high social costs with playing a magicker. It's always been their strongest counterbalance. Those remain, and are in more need of reinforcement than ever. It will be on the Sponsored roles and the mundane PCs of the world to reinforce it.
If mages become socially accepted, then there is no reason not to play them. And people will play them.
Magia delenda est
I will recommend something to everyone not happy with this change.
Make reasonable feedback, not call staff and players who are pumped about the change stupid.
Write a thoughtful, reasoned response.
If it includes things you shouldn't talk about having to do with magick, then do it in a request. (I sometimes even fuck up and put too much magick knowledge out there, hence my last moderated post).
I honestly can't believe -I- of all people am trying to show the rest of you reason. Wow the tables have turned.
Quote from: Dar on March 21, 2016, 10:10:50 PM
Quote from: Thunkkin on March 21, 2016, 10:07:36 PM
Quote from: Dar on March 21, 2016, 09:58:53 PM
...those extended subguilds were all ment to be for mages to round them out.
*Very* useful for the less martial mundane guilds, too. Very, very.
Give an example that's not merchant?
Ext Subguild + magicker guild was not the most popular of choices. In fact Ext. Subguilds are far more likely to be combined with mundane guilds. I don't wish to go in to details regarding the combinations but use of ext. subguilds adds a lot more options than just additional mastercraft options for some or options for magickers only.
Quote from: Armaddict on March 21, 2016, 10:21:30 PM
Quote from: Nergal on March 21, 2016, 10:06:07 PM
Quote from: Armaddict on March 21, 2016, 10:02:25 PM
QuoteWhat makes magick-casting more drastically beneficial than a solid set of mundane abilities? Only if you're treating magick purely as a way to increase your character's power would you come to a conclusion like that. Bear in mind that playing a magicker in general comes with severe inherent disadvantages.
I'm a little appalled that you can ask that, given the various threads over the past decade or so discussing the whole magicker vs mundane situation and why people liked magick being put off to the side (and didn't like it, as well, but their argument consisted of having weaknesses that no longer exist), and knowing full well that for just about every skill in the game, there is a magickal spell that can be used in the same way, but better.
But I will wait. There seem to be some who are happy about how powerful they can get now, at least. Me? I'm just not looking forward to having to deal with magickal roleplay more often, nor the incoming tirades about gemmed employment now that they can do things, or...just about any of it. The more I think about it, the -less- I see to look forward to with it, not more.
You (and many players) don't have a complete understanding of how magick worked. Just because there are threads with players discussing things doesn't mean they are correct, or the threads particularly notable. Consider the possibility that staff with knowledge of the workings of magick and mundane skills did their best to make changes while maintaining the relationship that existed between magickal and mundane skills.
...that's a complete cop out. I didn't say those threads were filled with exact information about what does what. I said that they pointed towards the clear idea that spells could make mundane skills very unnecessary. If you're going to argue about that, you can start spewing skills at me and I'll start spewing spells back at you. Inferring that I don't know some deep secret that actually makes spells -way weaker- than what I think is...really?
Likewise, consider that staff have indeed made poor judgments and decisions before, even with all this wisdom and knowledge and resources you've referenced. The whole reason players give you feedback is for your information to let you know when things are good or bad, but when you just toss them aside they do little good to anyone.
It's also hard to take feedback from players seriously when they have not tried the change. Concerns are one thing, and certainly welcome - staff have addressed many of them, and if there are new ones I'm sure we'll continue to try to address them. But declaring how something is going to work when they haven't tried it yet is dishonest. Try it out before arguing that something is too powerful, or not powerful enough. Try it out before declaring that losing the elemental guilds was a horrible thing.
Quote from: Nergal on March 21, 2016, 10:26:20 PM
Quote from: Armaddict on March 21, 2016, 10:21:30 PM
Quote from: Nergal on March 21, 2016, 10:06:07 PM
Quote from: Armaddict on March 21, 2016, 10:02:25 PM
QuoteWhat makes magick-casting more drastically beneficial than a solid set of mundane abilities? Only if you're treating magick purely as a way to increase your character's power would you come to a conclusion like that. Bear in mind that playing a magicker in general comes with severe inherent disadvantages.
I'm a little appalled that you can ask that, given the various threads over the past decade or so discussing the whole magicker vs mundane situation and why people liked magick being put off to the side (and didn't like it, as well, but their argument consisted of having weaknesses that no longer exist), and knowing full well that for just about every skill in the game, there is a magickal spell that can be used in the same way, but better.
But I will wait. There seem to be some who are happy about how powerful they can get now, at least. Me? I'm just not looking forward to having to deal with magickal roleplay more often, nor the incoming tirades about gemmed employment now that they can do things, or...just about any of it. The more I think about it, the -less- I see to look forward to with it, not more.
You (and many players) don't have a complete understanding of how magick worked. Just because there are threads with players discussing things doesn't mean they are correct, or the threads particularly notable. Consider the possibility that staff with knowledge of the workings of magick and mundane skills did their best to make changes while maintaining the relationship that existed between magickal and mundane skills.
...that's a complete cop out. I didn't say those threads were filled with exact information about what does what. I said that they pointed towards the clear idea that spells could make mundane skills very unnecessary. If you're going to argue about that, you can start spewing skills at me and I'll start spewing spells back at you. Inferring that I don't know some deep secret that actually makes spells -way weaker- than what I think is...really?
Likewise, consider that staff have indeed made poor judgments and decisions before, even with all this wisdom and knowledge and resources you've referenced. The whole reason players give you feedback is for your information to let you know when things are good or bad, but when you just toss them aside they do little good to anyone.
It's also hard to take feedback from players seriously when they have not tried the change. Concerns are one thing, and certainly welcome - staff have addressed many of them, and if there are new ones I'm sure we'll continue to try to address them. But declaring how something is going to work when they haven't tried it yet is dishonest. Try it out before arguing that something is too powerful, or not powerful enough. Try it out before declaring that losing the elemental guilds was a horrible thing.
This is a green-eggs and ham sort of thing, isn't it.
Also, because I got page-rolled:
Quote from: Nergal on March 21, 2016, 09:42:09 PM
Quote from: Lizzie on March 21, 2016, 09:33:54 PM
Quote from: Nergal on March 21, 2016, 09:22:58 PM
Quote from: KryosKeeping the existing guilds and ADDING the sub guilds I suspect, would have met near unanimous support I'm betting. This however, is already demonstrating that its upset/alienated a lot of players, and did so without so much as a warning.
Perhaps, but if we avoided doing things out of fear of alienating the playerbase then we would stop doing things. Instead, we saw a problem - magicker guilds weren't fully people, lacking a basic set of mundane skills that would be realistic for them to have, and the newer elements were relatively messily thrown together - and sought to correct it completely instead of getting it done halfway. A warning for a change of this nature would've caused people to apply for main-guild magickers before they were no longer available, and then we'd be forced to store everyone. We sought a way to place this change into the game more gradually.
My magickers have always been fully people. I've always roleplayed them that way. I almost resent that you think otherwise. It means I've failed in my roleplay, catastrophically. Magicker GUILDS aren't people at all. They are tools in a roleplayer's toolbox. Nothing more or less. But now you've decreed that we're not allowed to have one toolbox with all our tools nice and neat. We now have to have a few dozen toolboxes - and we're only allowed to use one per character.
I really wish you would have started with a couple of very basic questions to the playerbase, that wouldn't have tipped anyone off about anything: "Do you consider playing magick roles to be playing full people, and if not, does it bother you that the answer is no?"
If a bunch of mage-playing players weren't complaining that magickers aren't fully people, then the "magickers aren't fully people" isn't a problem. It's nothing that's broken, and nothing that needs to be fixed.
Quote from: Armaddict on March 21, 2016, 09:35:05 PM
QuoteIf a bunch of mage-playing players weren't complaining that magickers aren't fully people, then the "magickers aren't fully people" isn't a problem. It's nothing that's broken, and nothing that needs to be fixed.
Seriously. The solution to 'people playing mages as not real people' was to...this?!
Quote from: FantasyWriter on March 21, 2016, 09:40:13 PM
Quote from: Armaddict on March 21, 2016, 09:35:05 PM
QuoteIf a bunch of mage-playing players weren't complaining that magickers aren't fully people, then the "magickers aren't fully people" isn't a problem. It's nothing that's broken, and nothing that needs to be fixed.
Seriously. The solution to 'people playing mages as not real people' was to...this?!
Yeah, reading those type comments from staff, really hurt me in the feels.
But that's not what I said. I didn't say anything at all about how magickers were being played. I said the guilds themselves were lacking. Each magicker guild was a tree of spells + contact, barrier, and cooking. We didn't feel that accurately reflected the extent of what a Zalanthan was capable of doing or learning. We didn't feel that manifestation thematically meant that a Zalanthan lost almost all ability to do "mundane things".
I want to make it perfectly clear that this change wasn't brought on by what players were doing with their magicker PCs, and that any attempt to say so is dishonest. This is purely a long-standing issue we saw with the internal workings of the game that we decided to try to fix.
...all I heard there was 'Shhh, just let it happen.'
Quote from: Adhira on March 21, 2016, 10:24:57 PM
Ext Subguild + magicker guild was not the most popular of choices. In fact Ext. Subguilds are far more likely to be combined with mundane guilds. I don't wish to go in to details regarding the combinations but use of ext. subguilds adds a lot more options than just additional mastercraft options for some or options for magickers only.
Probably because it has never been non-special-application.
Quote from: Asmoth on March 21, 2016, 08:45:46 PM
Stuff
Yep, I was golden until Nyr decided he didn't like me, too.
Wanna hug it out or something?
/derail
Quote from: Iiyola on March 21, 2016, 09:34:15 PM
I had 1 elementalist with an ext sub approved, and 2 spec apps. Bye bye interesting roles.
I had a Drovian approved for the longest time, waiting for my current PC to die or have sound reason to retire.
Welp.
Quote from: LauraMars on March 21, 2016, 09:44:52 PM
Quote from: Iiyola on March 21, 2016, 09:34:15 PM
I had 1 elementalist with an ext sub approved, and 2 spec apps. Bye bye interesting roles.
Stuff.
This change canceled a lot of interesting roles people were looking forward to -- roles approved and assured to be waiting for us when our current characters were no more.
Surprise! Not only are they not waiting for us, but they're off the table forever, too.
If you don't see how that could result in someone saying 'bye bye interesting roles' with some legitimacy, you might consider a change of perspective.
If you lost something you were already approved for, you can send in a Game Related Question request about it and work something out with staff. Your special app slot certainly isn't lost.
Alright alright, I cooled down a bit and I'm starting to see some upsides. I sent in a new request for my approved roles and hopefully staff will do what I -think- they have in mind.
My only concern is the cut in the current mundane guilds which will come up real soon as well.
Personal opinion: I'd rather staff force stored all the current magic guilds or worked with them to move them to a new subguild. Now if I decide to make a sub-gick and see an old gick, I'm just going to be crazy salty.
Magick is super appealing to me now...
Would I like to make swords? Or throw fireballs?
Hard choice.
Quote from: lostinspace on March 21, 2016, 10:59:03 PM
Personal opinion: I'd rather staff force stored all the current magic guilds or worked with them to move them to a new subguild. Now if I decide to make a sub-gick and see an old gick, I'm just going to be crazy salty.
Kill them to absorb their power? It might work
Quote from: lostinspace on March 21, 2016, 10:59:03 PM
Personal opinion: I'd rather staff force stored all the current magic guilds or worked with them to move them to a new subguild. Now if I decide to make a sub-gick and see an old gick, I'm just going to be crazy salty.
And some of the full-spell magickers are going to be salty that they don't get to have a full main-guild set of mundane skills.
Quote from: RogueGunslinger on March 21, 2016, 11:01:25 PM
Quote from: lostinspace on March 21, 2016, 10:59:03 PM
Personal opinion: I'd rather staff force stored all the current magic guilds or worked with them to move them to a new subguild. Now if I decide to make a sub-gick and see an old gick, I'm just going to be crazy salty.
And some of the full-spell magickers are going to be salty that they don't get to have a full main-guild set of mundane skills.
Kill them to absorb their power?
Okey. I'm gonna stop now.
Quote from: RogueGunslinger on March 21, 2016, 11:01:25 PM
Quote from: lostinspace on March 21, 2016, 10:59:03 PM
Personal opinion: I'd rather staff force stored all the current magic guilds or worked with them to move them to a new subguild. Now if I decide to make a sub-gick and see an old gick, I'm just going to be crazy salty.
And some of the full-spell magickers are going to be salty that they don't get to have a full main-guild set of mundane skills.
Well they're all of 1 storage and 1 spec app away from getting what they want.
I, too, prefer greener grass.
Quote from: Vwest on March 21, 2016, 08:39:35 PM
This seems like it's going to make magick a much more common thing.
I'm very pro-magick, I like seeing it in-game and I've probably had more experience with playing magicked up mundanes than most. I'm not the person on the GDB complaining about how powerful magick guilds were, or fearing for the relevance of my mundane. I think magick and psionics and all that is an interesting source of conflict, as both an inward and personal thing and as a point of outward conflict.
With that said, I'm concerned about what this is going to do to the line between magicker and mundane and the potential power spike associated with having a lot of karma.
The line between a magicker and a mundane was a decisive one and with it came a lot of clear cut expectations and consequences; social limits, coded power limits and all that kind of thing. You couldn't ever circumvent them without incurring some other manner of downside. These weren't grey areas where you could easily blow it off, either.
This was black and white, hard documented, hard coded.
My concern here is... almost everyone has one karma point.
It means everyone except the cutest of newbies is going to have the option of rocking some magick every single time they make a character. The coded limitation of having magick power was that you weren't capable of doing the things mundane characters could -- you couldn't get more than subguild level combat skills, you could never enjoy the range of craft options a merchant does and you could never benefit from the insurmountable freedoms of being a ranger.
Now? You are a mundane with all the competitive advantages it entails, except you're also going to have the benefits of buffs, debuffs, self-healing or direct damage.
I've had a number of PCs who walked around with magick enhancements and you go from being a powerful combatant to an unstoppable super soldier. With even a minor armor buff, my heavily armored and high end warrior was unassailable, even faced with warriors with superior skills -- advanced weapon skills? Is that a razor weapon? Gaze upon my shadow sword and weep, motherfuckers.
Magick on mundanes is incredibly powerful and with everyone having the option of having some flavor of magick, I can't imagine many people not taking full advantage.
This means more people playing magickers, more people being exposed to magick and a general degradation of the already faltering status quo.
As someone on the karma blacklist for what I can comfortably assume is forever, this also reinforces my view that there is almost no point in playing the game in a competitive manner without some karma. The difference in power scale between someone with extended subguild options and someone without them is already incredible. See: Warrior / Outdoorsman and Ranger / Rogue.
With every mundane now having the karma-based option to also throw down some fireballs, heal themselves or teleport around the game world, pure mundanes won't even have the relative safety net of rock-paper-scissors. There is no point in having a high bash skill to counter a Krathi when the Krathi can now block / parry you on equal terms and let you kill yourself on a damage shield.
I've seen what groups of magickers and mundanes can accomplish working in tandem and it's cool and fun to be a part of. This change seems like it's going to remove the mundanes from the equation and worse, it's going to leave people without non-mundane options without any real chance to compete with those who do.
I like magick, I want to claim cautious optimism, but I'm honestly just plain cautious.
This feels like a very important point. It looks a lot like a massive 'haves and have-nots' situation.
I appreciate the way Vwest brought it up. In that they weren't a weenie about it.
The points are valid. I'm kinda excited to see. If it's too powerful, or it doesn't work, I have um, hope... it'll change?
I refute the point, hard as I may, that initial reactions are invalid. Staff removed 50% of the playable guild options in one fell swoop. That 50% was karma gated, and polarizing. Players do not need to experience any of these changes to know the impact on their enjoyment, even in the context of having 4 quartered and offered as semi-replacements. You can never, ever again play a full magick user. People know how that makes them feel.
Additionally, after the sorcerer guild was given the same treatment, players still post how unhappy they were about the changes now. The exact same thing was done to a rarer guild and yet the sting remains.
As for how the new sub guilds themselves play out, sure, absent experiencing their impact in the game you can't have a fully realized picture. But I think its safe to say that its a power bump in the overall game.
As for the rationalization of mages as people, I've yet to see any compelling counter argument against ESG/SG fleshing out mages as people.
The fact that you had to use special application to ESG a mage only distorts and strikes out their frequency of use as a valid point. You simply couldn't play the number of combinations you wished with any frequency, and had to meet criteria to even try. Unlock the karma requirement or special app gating and I would speculate you'd see them balloon.
I would have really liked to see the taking of a magicker sub-guild come coupled with the understanding it would forever limit your maximum potential in your main guild.
As it stands, if you can be a max warrior who also throws fireballs, I get the feeling a lot of people are going to opt for that, instead of just a vanilla max warrior.
However, if being able to throw fireballs came with the stipulation you will only ever get to 60% of your potential as a full warrior, well, at least it leaves warriors with a place in the world.
Quote from: Nergal on March 21, 2016, 09:30:47 PM
Quote from: Armaddict on March 21, 2016, 09:22:30 PM
QuoteHowever, the idea of these roles having a "cost" to playing them is accurate in one sense. By picking a magicker guild, you're giving up a way your character could be versatile in another manner. Bearing in mind that no guild is completely good at everything, any guild+magicker_subguild combination is going to have weaknesses. That will at least partly blunt the concern of magickers becoming overpowered, and will be addressed further during the guild revamp.
Weaknesses in what way? Because I'm guessing that exploiting said weaknesses will get you slapped with bad notes for abusing knowledge of the game, and the promise of weaknesses to them points out the weaknesses of the mundane more than it did before: A true mundane is now truly at a disadvantage, aside from the versatility of making their own crafts. There is magick in place to do pretty much any ESG better, which makes the subguild combinations very heavily weighted, as far as advantage, towards the magickal. Likewise, there is the promise of monitoring the play 'like a hawk' to make sure this goes well...the monitoring going on as is isn't that great, but we're being told to settle down because of the pledge of -more- attention on it, when attention seems to already be spread thin as it is.
I'm a little confused at what the -actual- accomplishment made here was. Make magick ambush us harder, when it was one of the more controversial items on whether players wanted it or didn't?
Edit: Holy shit, 7 replies I haven't read yet.
A warrior that takes a magick subguild isn't going to be able to:
- ride hands-free or trample anything
- have direction sense
- craft anything beyond cooking
- use stealth skills
- scan
- backstab or sap
- and more...
Whereas a warrior that takes a mundane subguild will be able to do one or more of these things. There are similar issues with picking a guild + a magick subguild. There is a trade-off in ways that there wasn't previously. And yet the power of a magicker is still maintained. Each aspect was designed with a theme in mind as well as playability. Yes, magickers are powerful, but fully mundane characters are still going to be desirable to play in their own right.
I feel like any two useful spells will be
vastly superior to anything you could've got from a mundane subguild. I mean, just imagine something like an assassin with the strength spell. That alone. That one thing is so mindblowingly better than anything else you could've gotten that I'm scared to even think of the results. And that magick subguild probably gets even more than that.
Quote from: Warsong on March 21, 2016, 11:26:20 PM
Quote from: Nergal on March 21, 2016, 09:30:47 PM
Quote from: Armaddict on March 21, 2016, 09:22:30 PM
QuoteHowever, the idea of these roles having a "cost" to playing them is accurate in one sense. By picking a magicker guild, you're giving up a way your character could be versatile in another manner. Bearing in mind that no guild is completely good at everything, any guild+magicker_subguild combination is going to have weaknesses. That will at least partly blunt the concern of magickers becoming overpowered, and will be addressed further during the guild revamp.
Weaknesses in what way? Because I'm guessing that exploiting said weaknesses will get you slapped with bad notes for abusing knowledge of the game, and the promise of weaknesses to them points out the weaknesses of the mundane more than it did before: A true mundane is now truly at a disadvantage, aside from the versatility of making their own crafts. There is magick in place to do pretty much any ESG better, which makes the subguild combinations very heavily weighted, as far as advantage, towards the magickal. Likewise, there is the promise of monitoring the play 'like a hawk' to make sure this goes well...the monitoring going on as is isn't that great, but we're being told to settle down because of the pledge of -more- attention on it, when attention seems to already be spread thin as it is.
I'm a little confused at what the -actual- accomplishment made here was. Make magick ambush us harder, when it was one of the more controversial items on whether players wanted it or didn't?
Edit: Holy shit, 7 replies I haven't read yet.
A warrior that takes a magick subguild isn't going to be able to:
- ride hands-free or trample anything
- have direction sense
- craft anything beyond cooking
- use stealth skills
- scan
- backstab or sap
- and more...
Whereas a warrior that takes a mundane subguild will be able to do one or more of these things. There are similar issues with picking a guild + a magick subguild. There is a trade-off in ways that there wasn't previously. And yet the power of a magicker is still maintained. Each aspect was designed with a theme in mind as well as playability. Yes, magickers are powerful, but fully mundane characters are still going to be desirable to play in their own right.
I feel like any two useful spells will be vastly superior to anything you could've got from a mundane subguild. I mean, just imagine something like an assassin with the strength spell. That alone. That one thing is so mindblowingly better than anything else you could've gotten that I'm scared to even think of the results. And that magick subguild probably gets even more than that.
Maybe I'm getting tired and not understanding, but...to what point, though?
Ranger is able to fly. They fly..they shoot animals, they skin them, they sell their hide, ad nauseum. They do this "better" than other Rangers. People find out they're a gicker. If they're not Gemmed, they're now banned from the one playable city-state left unless they take the gem. Other than that...they fly, shoot things, ad nauseum.
I am worried that most of this topic is surrounding the effects magick will have on the portion of the player base that plays only for, and believes the game is mainly, about combat. If that's the enjoyment you get out of the game, that's fine. Go be the flying Ranger who shoots things. Lord over the ground-stricken Rangers who aren't as cool as you who can fly. Laugh at their attempts to top you, because you can fly.
Until you get bored of flying, shooting things, skinning them and selling them to the one or two hide-sellers open to you. You can't go anywhere else because "Ranger who can fly," filthy gicker isn't welcome here.
If you're the Ranger who can fly that only likes to explore far and away places and not really interact with the player base too much...where's the harm? To everyone else, you're flying Ranger isn't even around to see and become upset about.
You can't imagine why people might want strength buffs for their assassins, healing spells for their warriors, etc.? I was responding to Nergal's point about how taking a magick subguild makes you give up whatever mundane subguild you could have gotten instead, and I was opining that the magick subguilds look like they'll be so much better than any mundane subguild that this sacrifice is completely inconsequential.
Quote from: Warsong on March 21, 2016, 11:52:05 PM
You can't imagine why people might want strength buffs for their assassins, healing spells for their warriors, etc.? I was responding to Nergal's point about how taking a magick subguild makes you give up whatever mundane subguild you could have gotten instead, and I was opining that the magick subguilds look like they'll be so much better than any mundane subguild that this sacrifice is completely inconsequential.
In this respect, I must for the moment say I agree with Nergal though about the subguilds themselves, and that aspect alone. The distribution, number, and affect of spells offered in any of these subguilds is largely unknown though I bet someone of wit could put more than 50% of it right just at a glance. Until they are used, we really don't know what the shape of it is.
Whats troublesome to me aside from matters discussed elsewhere(other threads), would be if said flying ranger from Pale Horse's example was an awesome role player who now, because the love flying rangers, has their footprint removed from most of the player base. Never again will there be a full fledged <mage>. The first incarnation of this met with heavy resistance, and no changes to assuage that outrage were made. Some metrics were stated by staff that are biased, and inaccurate due to limiting circumstances.
There's more to it than that, of course, but I'm actually having a great deal of trouble articulating it.
Quote from: Warsong on March 21, 2016, 11:52:05 PM
You can't imagine why people might want strength buffs for their assassins, healing spells for their warriors, etc.? I was responding to Nergal's point about how taking a magick subguild makes you give up whatever mundane subguild you could have gotten instead, and I was opining that the magick subguilds look like they'll be so much better than any mundane subguild that this sacrifice is completely inconsequential.
I get that, I do. I can understand the attraction.
I'm more lamenting that it feels, to me, like a lot of the antipathy to these changes is coming from those who see meta-gaming as the first and most important aspect or the only aspect for why guild and sub-guild combinations are chosen. That it must be "leet skills better than anyone else" for every role.
I get that for some, playing the "best" skill-set for a Ranger/Warrior/Merchant, etc, is where the fun comes from. I'm just worried that this thread feels dominated by that sentiment and is unfairly represented as a majority opinion.
..I don't know, I'm thinking rather fuzzily, right now. I should go to bed. My pessimism is getting the best of me.
Basically put. Remove all subguilds and the main mundane guilds are still self sufficient. They subguilds add a little bit to them, but they dont 'round them out'. They are 'already' rounded out pretty damn well. Then you add magick to their commonplace use.
Yes. Of course this is of little consequence to the social play. An aide, or just someone very city bound will not want spellcasting. Even if he or she is capable of it, they'll probably "never" use it, unless RP takes them that way. This is in part why I dont like the sorcerer subguilds. Because they were just too weak compared to massive absolute ostracism. Though I understand they got heavily strengthened now? I dunno now.
One of my main problems with this change is that this robs the magickers from a "need" for mundanes. They dont need mundanes. They 'are' mundanes with a bit of gickery. Problem is that a 'little' bit of gickery is enough to propel them to unparalleled amount of power. Enough that let's say 3 ruk mundanes (2 karma tops) can mow down pretty much ... the entirety of current Allanaki military PC mundane force. Add to it the fact that they are self sufficient. They're not reliant on any cities and so on.
Full Elementalists were complicated. It was hard to create a cohesive group out of them, because each player was playing out their element in some fashion. Their goals and aspirations were gradually otherwordly. There was a lot less 'empire building' ambition amongst them. At best, their most common ambition was "Create haven for other mages in some hard to reach spot, so nobody could throw stones at us!" Now though, things change. The mages are a lot more human now. They're basically mundanes with superpowers. They're basically ... breeds. Which means it is a lot easier for them to unite, a lot easier for them to plot, and arrange contacts, and so on, and so on. Eventually, via charisma, ability, and excellence ... there "will" be a group that is grudgedly accepted by some society. Luirs outpost and Red Storm. Some Tribes.
Keep in mind. Red Fangs were mostly accepted in many areas. Allanak and Tuluk were never their 'friends' but they dealt and negotiated with them as often as any other civilization spot.
All I'm saying is that this change, will actually make it "easier" for these freaky mundanes to be accepted, not harder. It'll be up to players to not allow this to happen. It wont be easy and will cause people to die due to their principles. A lot more often then it used to happen with 'full' mages.
Quote from: Desertman on March 21, 2016, 11:25:21 PM
I would have really liked to see the taking of a magicker sub-guild come coupled with the understanding it would forever limit your maximum potential in your main guild.
As it stands, if you can be a max warrior who also throws fireballs, I get the feeling a lot of people are going to opt for that, instead of just a vanilla max warrior.
However, if being able to throw fireballs came with the stipulation you will only ever get to 60% of your potential as a full warrior, well, at least it leaves warriors with a place in the world.
You need six karma to play a mage that can (probably) chuck fireballs. Or three karma to special app one. I don't think they'll be all that common.
I was hoping there was a way for a magicker to pick two of the aspects and a subguild. Seems like I was wrong.
I'm a bit more skeptical of the change now.
Quote from: LauraMars on March 22, 2016, 12:28:49 AM
Quote from: Desertman on March 21, 2016, 11:25:21 PM
I would have really liked to see the taking of a magicker sub-guild come coupled with the understanding it would forever limit your maximum potential in your main guild.
As it stands, if you can be a max warrior who also throws fireballs, I get the feeling a lot of people are going to opt for that, instead of just a vanilla max warrior.
However, if being able to throw fireballs came with the stipulation you will only ever get to 60% of your potential as a full warrior, well, at least it leaves warriors with a place in the world.
You need six karma to play a mage that can (probably) chuck fireballs. Or three karma to special app one. I don't think they'll be all that common.
Well, you need two karma to play a warrior that can (probably) cast armor and stoneskin, and then some. I don't think he was talking specifically about fireballs. In fact, I think casting fireballs seems like something that a warrior wouldn't be so concerned with, being the expert on weapons and attack-based skills.
QuoteI'm more lamenting that it feels, to me, like a lot of the antipathy to these changes is coming from those who see meta-gaming as the first and most important aspect or the only aspect for why guild and sub-guild combinations are chosen. That it must be "leet skills better than anyone else" for every role.
FYI...I was not speaking for myself in terms of combat. I was very specifically referencing the choices of others in regards to this, since the GDB has been filled up with all sorts of skill-oriented and maximum-efficacy conversation for the past while. I know it's becoming more and more of a prevalent mindset.
-My- part of it comes in with relying on that, knowing that I'm going to be in the position of having to interact with magick more regularly. Not less. The arguments made by me were based on making magecraft 'too good to pass up', by making it both subguild only and having no -real- drawback to selecting it, now that the true drawback of its selection was removed (i.e. I expect the social stigma to fade, and for magick to be hidden more commonly and easily).
QuoteAll I'm saying is that this change, will actually make it "easier" for these freaky mundanes to be accepted, not harder. It'll be up to players to not allow this to happen. It wont be easy and will cause people to die due to their principles. A lot more often then it used to happen with 'full' mages.
And this was along the lines of what I originally asserted, which was engaged, which turned into debate on that topic.
QuoteTo everyone else, you're flying Ranger isn't even around to see and become upset about.
So what you're asserting, then, is that with this change, mages will become -less- visible, and not more?
Quote from: Warsong on March 22, 2016, 12:37:31 AMWell, you need two karma to play a warrior that can (probably) cast armor and stoneskin, and then some. I don't think he was talking specifically about fireballs.
good point
But I still don't think mundane classes are going to be dominated by magickal subguilds to the point of ridiculousness, simply by virtue of them being a) as socially ostracized and outlawed as ever and b) still being behind a karma barrier.
Rogues are extremely attractive now.
Quote from: Armaddict on March 22, 2016, 12:39:11 AM
QuoteI'm more lamenting that it feels, to me, like a lot of the antipathy to these changes is coming from those who see meta-gaming as the first and most important aspect or the only aspect for why guild and sub-guild combinations are chosen. That it must be "leet skills better than anyone else" for every role.
FYI...I was not speaking for myself in terms of combat. I was very specifically referencing the choices of others in regards to this, since the GDB has been filled up with all sorts of skill-oriented and maximum-efficacy conversation for the past while. I know it's becoming more and more of a prevalent mindset.
-My- part of it comes in with relying on that, knowing that I'm going to be in the position of having to interact with magick more regularly. Not less. The arguments made by me were based on making magecraft 'too good to pass up', by making it both subguild only and having no -real- drawback to selecting it, now that the true drawback of its selection was removed (i.e. I expect the social stigma to fade, and for magick to be hidden more commonly and easily).
QuoteAll I'm saying is that this change, will actually make it "easier" for these freaky mundanes to be accepted, not harder. It'll be up to players to not allow this to happen. It wont be easy and will cause people to die due to their principles. A lot more often then it used to happen with 'full' mages.
And this was along the lines of what I originally asserted, which was engaged, which turned into debate on that topic.
QuoteTo everyone else, you're flying Ranger isn't even around to see and become upset about.
So what you're asserting, then, is that with this change, mages will become -less- visible, and not more?
Well I would assume that a flying ranger would be VERY hard to see....
Quote from: LauraMars on March 22, 2016, 12:41:36 AM
Quote from: Warsong on March 22, 2016, 12:37:31 AMWell, you need two karma to play a warrior that can (probably) cast armor and stoneskin, and then some. I don't think he was talking specifically about fireballs.
good point
But I still don't think mundane classes are going to be dominated by magickal subguilds to the point of ridiculousness, simply by virtue of them being a) as socially ostracized and outlawed as ever and b) still being behind a karma barrier.
I don't know how things were in the past, but right now, there's quite a few gemmed around. And that's when they can't really join clans or do much besides be wizards. I think there's going to be less gemmed, or at least probably not more than now, but for a long while every clan will have secret magickers in them because these can no longer be sussed out, and can now be useful irrespective of their magick. That's actually the part that I don't mind, but I feel like giving them the full power of any mundane guild seems like it'll just be too good.
As soon as those useful mundane-guild characters cast a spell, they'll still have to deal with the fact that they're an outed magicker, at least to their clan if not the world at large.
We'll only see rogue magickers in GMH and other crews if their leaders allow it.
Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 22, 2016, 12:59:21 AM
We'll only see rogue magickers in GMH and other crews if their leaders allow it.
Which I hope they do either openly or covertly.
This you can only work for Oash and some unnamed GMH is bullshit. (My opinion).
Quote from: Jingo on March 22, 2016, 12:36:50 AM
I was hoping there was a way for a magicker to pick two of the aspects and a subguild. Seems like I was wrong.
I'm a bit more skeptical of the change now.
Yeah I realized that not too long ago as well. Hrm.
Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 22, 2016, 12:59:21 AM
As soon as those useful mundane-guild characters cast a spell, they'll still have to deal with the fact that they're an outed magicker, at least to their clan if not the world at large.
We'll only see rogue magickers in GMH and other crews if their leaders allow it.
Well, they can just refrain from casting spells in front of others. It should be rather trivial to maintain secrecy in that regard, ensuring that the only way to get found out is if you're spied on by someone unseen while you use magick, or are detected with magick effects by the rather few people who can do that. If you have any degree of privacy at all and do any of your work alone, such as a hunter might, it should be easy. Since they get to be full-blown mundanes, they won't rely on these spells and can simply use them in situations where it matters a lot -- like PKing.
It should be way, way easier for magickers to remain rogue now that magick isn't the source of their power and usefulness, but rather an augmentation to it. I like that that's the case, but I worry that it'll dwarf regular mundanes if magick ones become common. The "wizard" model had far less overlap. I'm more than a little apprehensive about making magickers objectively superior to mundanes in literally every conceivable way. They're just simply better characters at everything, making me feel so much less enthusiastic about my non-magickal character.
Fuck my life for looking one more time before I went to bed...
I think you have to realize that this change isn't solely for pk purposes.
All a good majority are worried about is, (paraphrasing) The magick warrior can use magick to kill me!
Not everyone who plays the game is trying to murder you. I personally will, if capable play a flying ranger because that will be fun as shit. Not because I wanna drop stones on your regular mundane head.
Do we need to be prepared for overblown twinkdom, yup, but have some faith that everyone isn't sceming to kidder you everytime they come across you.
Quote from: Warsong on March 22, 2016, 01:29:43 AM
I'm more than a little apprehensive about making magickers objectively superior to mundanes in literally every conceivable way. They're just simply better characters at everything, making me feel so much less enthusiastic about my non-magickal character.
Having no one ever want to talk to me ever again seems like a good trade for that, in my opinion.
Hold your horses. The new subguilds still have a couple of bugs in 'em.
Hey these new Guild pages are pretty sweet
I am also immensely disappointed that there is no available Nilazi anything.
Quote from: Warsong on March 22, 2016, 01:29:43 AM
It should be way, way easier for magickers to remain rogue now that magick isn't the source of their power and usefulness, but rather an augmentation to it. I like that that's the case, but I worry that it'll dwarf regular mundanes if magick ones become common. The "wizard" model had far less overlap. I'm more than a little apprehensive about making magickers objectively superior to mundanes in literally every conceivable way. They're just simply better characters at everything, making me feel so much less enthusiastic about my non-magickal character.
People keep talking about this from a 'coded power' perspective. There are certainly some codedly powerful options available with these changes, but combining some of the mundane guilds with extended subguilds is also really powerful. These types also have the advantage of not being pariahs and walking capital offenses, if undeclared.
Magickers have always been codedly very powerful and able to murder your PC if they want to - this update doesn't really change that fact, but it does change how they have to go about doing it. In fact, they'll have to earn some of their prowess the hard way now.
From a coded perspective Stealth is still OP as it should be. Thus I will always have a hard time giving that up along with the ability to ride out and survive anywhere in the known.
That said, this change makes magickers both more interesting RP wise and still powerful in their own right.
Quote from: Kryos on March 22, 2016, 02:29:53 AM
Quote from: Dresan on March 22, 2016, 02:25:11 AM
I am glad the staff made these changes.
The reasons people want the old sorcerer's are the same reason I DON'T want to see the old sorcerers back. There is too much coded power and not enough RP opportunities with regular mundane (and gemmers) that don't feel like one side should be shivering in their boots the entire time.
With these changes you can RP a magicker who is a person FIRST, a person who is just a hunter, warrior, someone normal who just happens to have magickal abilities. While from a coded point of view thats still incredibly power (though warrior/stealth is still OP) but more importantly it opens up an incredibly amount of RP opportunity.
And now with these changes staff is taking a look at those RP opportunities more closely, maybe now water magickers might have some more interesting RP opportunities. These are the things players have been asking for YEARS.
The days of CAM and super powered beings are gone. Good riddance. I look forward to the more whole-some RP opportunities with this new version of magickers.
I'd point you to the log submission area. Where a Sorcerer by reference has entertained 7 high powered roles, and by the nature of that engagement, absolutely everyone under them to some degree. Sorcerer drove one of the most sweeping plots in recent history. And that's before we add in all the non referenced interactions.
This CAM malarky is a bit often pulled out, never modernly referenced. Only references I know of are 2, both of which are in the logs posted about awesome RP and world changing politics and events.
Lastly, this thread isn't about discussing the changes themselves, but the manner in which they were executed and the perceived lack of impact players have on changes. They happen, we offer our response in futility, and that is bad.
This snuck into the wrong thread, but I believe has some merit in discussion material here. So I'm transplanting it. Not the part at the end where I begin with Lastly though, that should stay where it belongs.
Quote from: Asmoth on March 22, 2016, 01:52:20 AM
Fuck my life for looking one more time before I went to bed...
I think you have to realize that this change isn't solely for pk purposes.
All a good majority are worried about is, (paraphrasing) The magick warrior can use magick to kill me!
Not everyone who plays the game is trying to murder you. I personally will, if capable play a flying ranger because that will be fun as shit. Not because I wanna drop stones on your regular mundane head.
Do we need to be prepared for overblown twinkdom, yup, but have some faith that everyone isn't sceming to kidder you everytime they come across you.
I feel like every post of yours is a holier-than-thou soapbox preach that ignores every point anybody makes in order to talk down at people in extreme strawman fashion.
It's just an incredibly condescending and insulting manner of debate. It's like you go out of your way to assume people are stupid or have the worst possible motivations.
I saw nothing wrong with magickers being able to attain immense power with little effort if you can get your foot in the door, or in an Elementalist's case, having the door thrown open whether you like it or not. I think that's what magick should be. A totally unfair trump card that you are unable to compensate against. I think it's as themely to be wiped out by some asshole throwing a fireball at you as it is a Templar to throw you in the arena. People talk at length about how magick should be rare, and I don't think it should be prolific, but insisting that it be some four-leaf clover shrouded in mystique that you can only hope to experience once in five characters' lifetimes seems ridiculous to me.
I do not understand the motivation for removing magicker guilds that could not have been served by NOT removing them but still keeping these additional subguilds.
Quote from: seidhr on March 22, 2016, 02:45:45 AM
Quote from: Warsong on March 22, 2016, 01:29:43 AM
It should be way, way easier for magickers to remain rogue now that magick isn't the source of their power and usefulness, but rather an augmentation to it. I like that that's the case, but I worry that it'll dwarf regular mundanes if magick ones become common. The "wizard" model had far less overlap. I'm more than a little apprehensive about making magickers objectively superior to mundanes in literally every conceivable way. They're just simply better characters at everything, making me feel so much less enthusiastic about my non-magickal character.
People keep talking about this from a 'coded power' perspective. There are certainly some codedly powerful options available with these changes, but combining some of the mundane guilds with extended subguilds is also really powerful. These types also have the advantage of not being pariahs and walking capital offenses, if undeclared.
Magickers have always been codedly very powerful and able to murder your PC if they want to - this update doesn't really change that fact, but it does change how they have to go about doing it. In fact, they'll have to earn some of their prowess the hard way now.
If there was such a thing as a record of who's best at each general thing (archery, fighting, poisons, travel, etc.), magickers would now hold every single record across the board, without exception. It just feels... I know people go insane at the mention of the word "balance" in this game, but that's frankly it, and I think it's relevant and necessary in this context. It doesn't sit well with me and I'd like to hear staff's perspective on why this part of the change is beneficial to the game. It rather seems to me that it has now been manifested that the only way to be the best at X is to be a magicker, where X is literally anything. They were the most powerful before, in a general sense, which was totally fine; but they weren't
the best at everything. It feels boring and unnecessary.
The mundane subguilds don't match up to magick. I doubt they're meant to. That was fine when magickers didn't compete universally with mundanes at everything. Even though the game isn't one big competition, it still matters and affects gameplay in a very major way, and therefore roleplay as well. Magickers were more powerful because magick could generally defeat the proverbial sword. But they could also be vulnerable and couldn't just do everything, so they'd sometimes have to rely on non-magick people for things they could do better. Now, magickers are just objectively superior individuals. The nuance seems gone, and I feel like magickers have lost quite a lot of what was special about them. They also don't sound very interesting anymore, but that's another matter.
Magickers being more powerful than mundanes felt okay when they were more powerful because they were different, and therefore also vulnerable in certain ways. Now they're just as good at all the things mundanes do, and therefore neither terribly different nor at all vulnerable in any mechanical way (aside from things everybody is vulnerable to), and have spells on top to let them do things that blow any extended subguild out of the water, let alone the basic ones.
I don't know. It just feels unnecessary.
Little bummed to lose the Elkrosian/Drovian/Nilazi guilds, but overall I love this change and it makes playing magickers a much more attractive option to me now. I always wanted to play a mage that didn't manifest powers for years and years, but worried I'd be terribly bored given my character would be awful at everything but magick.
Really eager to give this a try.
(http://i.imgur.com/f3DoyJS.png)
(http://glittertextmaker.info/glittertext/holdz/z56f136c78de3c.gif)
The only guild I'm bummed to lose is nilazi. My personal reason is that Elkrosian/Drovian never seemed very thematic to me (electricity isn't an element as much as it is part of the storm, and darkness is really just a subset of light). Nilazi is the only one of those that felt unique to me in a cool way and was universally something I was terrified of.
I enjoyed having things to be terrified as fuck about on an OOC level. I can confidently say that with sorcerers gone I've lost a good chunk of that. I haven't seen a single sorcerer thing or plot since they went, which to me has felt like losing one of the game's big bads. Losing nilazi is like losing the other to me.
Quote from: Rathustra on March 21, 2016, 04:35:37 PM
We are looking to cycle in the spells from the drovian/elkrosian/nilazi trees into the game in compelling and thematically interesting ways.
Quote from: Xalle on March 22, 2016, 08:52:40 AM
Quote from: Rathustra on March 21, 2016, 04:35:37 PM
We are looking to cycle in the spells from the drovian/elkrosian/nilazi trees into the game in compelling and thematically interesting ways.
At the risk of asking "are we there yet" - can we have some rough timeline on when we can expect these three guilds' spells to be cycled-in please?
Mana doesn't regenerate yet, so if your concept depended on magick first, everything else second, you might want to keep your old character for a while.
I'm really disappointed nobody felt like flexing a creative muscle and tying this change to something rad happening in-game.
It's either straight up laziness or apathy.
Quote from: Incognito on March 22, 2016, 09:08:06 AM
Quote from: Xalle on March 22, 2016, 08:52:40 AM
Quote from: Rathustra on March 21, 2016, 04:35:37 PM
We are looking to cycle in the spells from the drovian/elkrosian/nilazi trees into the game in compelling and thematically interesting ways.
At the risk of asking "are we there yet" - can we have some rough timeline on when we can expect these three guilds' spells to be cycled-in please?
There is currently no timeline for this, but it is possible it will occur parallel to other changes to the guilds.
Quote from: manonfire on March 22, 2016, 10:50:35 AM
I'm really disappointed nobody felt like flexing a creative muscle and tying this change to something rad happening in-game.
It's either straight up laziness or apathy.
That's just like, your opinion, man.
Also, the updates on the GDB only cover OOC elements of the change. If anything is happening IC, given the sensitivity of the subject, it will not be announced here.
(http://i.imgur.com/l74Jy1h.gif)
8 karma roles, dude.
In regards to the recent release notes:
Nope. Still seeing magicker options as main guilds and no sub-guild options during character creation on my account. Doesn't matter how many times I login and out.
I still have elementalist main guilds as options too. I was considering creating an elementalist for one last hoorah! According to the announcement, these won't get changed until a character enters the game. Time to make a concept with shelf life and hopefully live a long time I think.
Quote from: Molten Heart on March 22, 2016, 11:29:00 AM
I still have elementalist main guilds as options too. I was considering creating an elementalist for one last hoorah! According to the announcement, these won't get changed until a character enters the game. Time to make a concept with shelf life and hopefully live a long time I think.
I was/am considering, myself.
Not the "last hoorah!" with the options I have open as they're now gone (Fare-thee-well, Nilazi!), but I'm tempted by the new sub-guilds.
Quote from: Rathustra on March 22, 2016, 11:14:56 AM
Quote from: manonfire on March 22, 2016, 10:50:35 AM
I'm really disappointed nobody felt like flexing a creative muscle and tying this change to something rad happening in-game.
It's either straight up laziness or apathy.
That's just like, your opinion, man.
Also, the updates on the GDB only cover OOC elements of the change. If anything is happening IC, given the sensitivity of the subject, it will not be announced here.
Obviously, I don't expect anyone to post double secret details on the GDB about how code changes are introduced IC'ly - but you stated pretty clearly that this change is OOC only, so that isn't something I even remotely expect.
Quote from: RathustraWhat is the IC explanation for these changes?
These changes are only being marked OOCly. Nothing monumental has changed in the game world - there will be no spectacular shift or RPT to mark this change.
Much like the sorcerer change - my question remains basically the same - why
didn't you guys do something fun with it? Why not a phased change based on player reactions in a plotline? You don't have to involve players with changes in code - it is, after all, your playground, but why wouldn't you want the playerbase be a witness to the change IC'ly?
I can only come up with two answers.
Quote from: manonfire on March 22, 2016, 11:58:20 AM
Obviously, I don't expect anyone to post double secret details on the GDB about how code changes are introduced IC'ly - but you stated pretty clearly that this change is OOC only, so that isn't something I even remotely expect.
Really? They never stated that. Multiple times staff has mentioned the possibility that certain characters may notice things or come to learn things ICly. I guess we're reading between the lines differently?
Quote
I can only come up with two answers.
As a sometimes jaded player, it's helpful to see why staff get jaded, too.
Quote from: manonfire on March 22, 2016, 11:58:20 AM
Quote from: Rathustra on March 22, 2016, 11:14:56 AM
Quote from: manonfire on March 22, 2016, 10:50:35 AM
I'm really disappointed nobody felt like flexing a creative muscle and tying this change to something rad happening in-game.
It's either straight up laziness or apathy.
That's just like, your opinion, man.
Also, the updates on the GDB only cover OOC elements of the change. If anything is happening IC, given the sensitivity of the subject, it will not be announced here.
Obviously, I don't expect anyone to post double secret details on the GDB about how code changes are introduced IC'ly - but you stated pretty clearly that this change is OOC only, so that isn't something I even remotely expect.
Quote from: RathustraWhat is the IC explanation for these changes?
These changes are only being marked OOCly. Nothing monumental has changed in the game world - there will be no spectacular shift or RPT to mark this change.
Much like the sorcerer change - my question remains basically the same - why didn't you guys do something fun with it? Why not a phased change based on player reactions in a plotline? You don't have to involve players with changes in code - it is, after all, your playground, but why wouldn't you want the playerbase be a witness to the change IC'ly?
I can only come up with two answers.
The changes are only being marked/remarked upon/highlighted OOCly. There is no spectacular in-game change. This is not incompatible with my second statement.
Your only coming up with two answers though - that's your problem. I can't really say anything to satisfy it.
I am amazed that some of you haven't been banned for a week yet. If I took such a tone, publicly with staff on be hit with the ban hammer.
Everyone is freaking out about something only a handful of characters have even experienced, and from the release notes, just now are they able to even fully experience it that their mana will regen.
Everyone needs to calm down and play one first before freaking out.
Quote from: manonfire on March 22, 2016, 11:58:20 AM
Much like the sorcerer change - my question remains basically the same - why didn't you guys do something fun with it? Why not a phased change based on player reactions in a plotline? You don't have to involve players with changes in code - it is, after all, your playground, but why wouldn't you want the playerbase be a witness to the change IC'ly?
I can only come up with two answers.
Could staff have tied this into an IC event? Yes.
Did they have to? No. It isn't a fault that they did not.
There is nothing intrinsically wrong with changing the code or balance of the game without tying it to an IC event.
I really don't have to say anything besides the above sentence, but:
I find the attitude you're displaying here weird and aggressive. "You didn't take a potential opportunity here, therefore you're apathetic or lazy."
Because deciding to change something without optionally tying it into an IC event means you are apathetic or lazy. What?
Regardless of whether or not you agree with the changes,
staff has invested time and effort into changing something. It's the opposite of apathy or laziness. Even if you feel it isn't good enough for you.
I realize that changing the way magick guilds work is different than just altering numbers in melee combat code. I realize there was more potential here to tie it into IC events.
But, shit - this kind of "not good enough! Therefore worthy of complaint!" attitude is fucking poisonous.
Quote from: Asmoth on March 22, 2016, 12:19:17 PM
I am amazed that some of you haven't been banned for a week yet. If I took such a tone, publicly with staff on be hit with the ban hammer.
Everyone is freaking out about something only a handful of characters have even experienced, and from the release notes, just now are they able to even fully experience it that their mana will regen.
Everyone needs to calm down and play one first before freaking out.
I'm not sure we're reading the responses here in the same tone. I've been seeing a lot of legitimate concerns. Some of them are repetitive, but you can't expect everyone to respond to such a sweeping change with universal excitement.
Everyone here really enjoys this game and wants what they think would be best for it. I don't see anyone being any more "freaking out" than you, which isn't to say that you are either, just that reading other people's posts in the same tone you read your own might offer some perspective.
Quote from: Pale Horse on March 22, 2016, 11:23:34 AM
In regards to the recent release notes:
Nope. Still seeing magicker options as main guilds and no sub-guild options during character creation on my account. Doesn't matter how many times I login and out.
Your options won't update until you enter the game as a PC and leave the game again. Since you don't have an active PC you can create one and enter the game as them, then quit out, and submit a storage request immediately. That'll update your options.
Quote from: Asmoth on March 22, 2016, 12:19:17 PM
I am amazed that some of you haven't been banned for a week yet. If I took such a tone, publicly with staff on be hit with the ban hammer.
Everyone is freaking out about something only a handful of characters have even experienced, and from the release notes, just now are they able to even fully experience it that their mana will regen.
Everyone needs to calm down and play one first before freaking out.
I'm not interested in playing a mage sub-guild that is either a "hint/touch" of what a full-on guild used to be, or only one "aspect" without any of the other aspects. Just like with sorcery - I wanted to play a sorcerer. The whole shebang. Not just an aspect of it. I have zero interest in trying this out. I USED to look forward to trying the magick classes I'd never tried before. I USED to look forward to my next whiran. Now, I have no interest at all. That's why I hate it. Because it just suddenly lost my interest in a single post.
Quote from: Lizzie on March 22, 2016, 12:33:20 PM
Quote from: Asmoth on March 22, 2016, 12:19:17 PM
I am amazed that some of you haven't been banned for a week yet. If I took such a tone, publicly with staff on be hit with the ban hammer.
Everyone is freaking out about something only a handful of characters have even experienced, and from the release notes, just now are they able to even fully experience it that their mana will regen.
Everyone needs to calm down and play one first before freaking out.
I'm not interested in playing a mage sub-guild that is either a "hint/touch" of what a full-on guild used to be, or only one "aspect" without any of the other aspects. Just like with sorcery - I wanted to play a sorcerer. The whole shebang. Not just an aspect of it. I have zero interest in trying this out. I USED to look forward to trying the magick classes I'd never tried before. I USED to look forward to my next whiran. Now, I have no interest at all. That's why I hate it. Because it just suddenly lost my interest in a single post.
Yes I got that, I got that last night when you said the same thing three times in three different posts.
You can be upset, you can be disappointed.
But what do think repeating the same thing over and over is going to change? Do you think they are going to go, Hey guys, Lizzie is pretty upset about this, maybe we should change it back?
That is not going to happen. And for the record I wish they left full mages in AND added these new subguilds, but they didn't and I understand that Asmoth ain't stopping the tide. Maybe you should realize that Lizzie isn't parting the Red Sea either? (I'm not religious, was that Moses thing accurate or was it a different sea?")
Quote from: Asmoth on March 22, 2016, 12:44:31 PM
Quote from: Lizzie on March 22, 2016, 12:33:20 PM
Quote from: Asmoth on March 22, 2016, 12:19:17 PM
I am amazed that some of you haven't been banned for a week yet. If I took such a tone, publicly with staff on be hit with the ban hammer.
Everyone is freaking out about something only a handful of characters have even experienced, and from the release notes, just now are they able to even fully experience it that their mana will regen.
Everyone needs to calm down and play one first before freaking out.
I'm not interested in playing a mage sub-guild that is either a "hint/touch" of what a full-on guild used to be, or only one "aspect" without any of the other aspects. Just like with sorcery - I wanted to play a sorcerer. The whole shebang. Not just an aspect of it. I have zero interest in trying this out. I USED to look forward to trying the magick classes I'd never tried before. I USED to look forward to my next whiran. Now, I have no interest at all. That's why I hate it. Because it just suddenly lost my interest in a single post.
Yes I got that, I got that last night when you said the same thing three times in three different posts.
You can be upset, you can be disappointed.
But what do think repeating the same thing over and over is going to change? Do you think they are going to go, Hey guys, Lizzie is pretty upset about this, maybe we should change it back?
That is not going to happen. And for the record I wish they left full mages in AND added these new subguilds, but they didn't and I understand that Asmoth ain't stopping the tide. Maybe you should realize that Lizzie isn't parting the Red Sea either? (I'm not religious, was that Moses thing accurate or was it a different sea?")
I really don't get behind your "better not complain or try or voice any concern because theres no way it will change"
It's so passive and regressive it's off putting like hell.
"Do you think they are going to go, Hey guys, Lizzie is pretty upset about this, maybe we should change it back?"
If everyone in the game said "Hey this change is fucking bad" do I think staff would change it? Probably. But no they better not voice any complaint.
No matter how many times you try to stop people from voicing negative opinions, Asmoth, they're still going to do it despite you. It's utterly futile so you might as well just go with it.
I'm on my phone so I can't find that quote yet but seidr or however you spell her name, just said last night that they don't go with popular opinion because it would be impossible to get a majority vote.
I'm sure they will look over the data and see what people are playing in the months and year to come and make edits. This is not the end of the world guys.
Some character live a long ass time, some die in a day, with that swing in longevity, you can't expect changes based on feedback to come in a few days or even a few months. There simply won't be enough players who used and tested the system by then.
And on a joking and slightly serious side, stop trying to ruin my Flying Ranger concept before I ever get a chance to play one with this complaining! Geez.
Seems complicated.
I am alarmed at re-learning the process. :(
Quote from: Large Hero on March 22, 2016, 12:30:49 PM
Quote from: manonfire on March 22, 2016, 11:58:20 AM
Much like the sorcerer change - my question remains basically the same - why didn't you guys do something fun with it? Why not a phased change based on player reactions in a plotline? You don't have to involve players with changes in code - it is, after all, your playground, but why wouldn't you want the playerbase be a witness to the change IC'ly?
I can only come up with two answers.
Could staff have tied this into an IC event? Yes.
Did they have to? No. It isn't a fault that they did not.
There is nothing intrinsically wrong with changing the code or balance of the game without tying it to an IC event.
I really don't have to say anything besides the above sentence, but:
I find the attitude you're displaying here weird and aggressive. "You didn't take a potential opportunity here, therefore you're apathetic or lazy."
Because deciding to change something without optionally tying it into an IC event means you are apathetic or lazy. What?
Regardless of whether or not you agree with the changes, staff has invested time and effort into changing something. It's the opposite of apathy or laziness. Even if you feel it isn't good enough for you.
I realize that changing the way magick guilds work is different than just altering numbers in melee combat code. I realize there was more potential here to tie it into IC events.
But, shit - this kind of "not good enough! Therefore worthy of complaint!" attitude is fucking poisonous.
Skipping over all your strawman static,
Granted, there's nothing intrinsically wrong with not tying code changes to an IC event, but throttle back a half-second and be cognizant of what type of game we're playing here. It's a high-fantasy sandbox where players come to create and reside in an alternate reality because
it's fucking fun. This is a
huge change. There's literally three entire guilds disappearing from the game. No more Elkrans. No more Drovians. No more Nilazi. Coupled with that, the basic paradigm of what elementalists (which comprised basically half of the available guilds) are is changing. Half the guilds in the game will
never be the same again.
Moreso than the sorcerer guild revamp, these changes
beg for a spectacular shift IG or an RPT.
I'm disappointed there wasn't one.
Personally I wouldn't rush to conclude "This is an OOC change" meaning "There will be no IC consequences or acknowledgement or anything."
Staff bungled the announcement of Tuluk's closure (imo) with similar language as they're using here, which made it sound like the City would just shut down with no RP to justify it. That isn't actually what happened, but I wish Staff hadn't implied "this is all OOC with no IC consequences beyond not being able to play X anymore." I would have had more fun during the closure if that was the case.
I can already think of a few things that might be related to this in game, or conceivably affect it. So don't give up hope that there's not going to be any RP behind it.
If Nak doesn't get zombie rushed in the next two weeks I'll be dissapointed.
Quote from: seidhr on March 22, 2016, 12:33:17 PM
Quote from: Pale Horse on March 22, 2016, 11:23:34 AM
In regards to the recent release notes:
Nope. Still seeing magicker options as main guilds and no sub-guild options during character creation on my account. Doesn't matter how many times I login and out.
Your options won't update until you enter the game as a PC and leave the game again. Since you don't have an active PC you can create one and enter the game as them, then quit out, and submit a storage request immediately. That'll update your options.
Ooooooh...I get it!
Thank you.
Quote from: Jihelu on March 22, 2016, 01:18:30 PM
If Nak doesn't get zombie rushed in the next two weeks I'll be dissapointed.
Get used to disappointment [/dreadpiratetalk].
No more Nilazi for the time being, remember?
Quote from: Pale Horse on March 22, 2016, 01:21:56 PM
Quote from: Jihelu on March 22, 2016, 01:18:30 PM
If Nak doesn't get zombie rushed in the next two weeks I'll be dissapointed.
Get used to disappointment [/dreadpiratetalk].
No more Nilazi for the time being, remember?
There's almost certainly still some in-game. And still some people with spec-apps that were accepted that haven't even gotten in game yet.
Quote from: RogueGunslinger on March 22, 2016, 01:24:35 PM
Quote from: Pale Horse on March 22, 2016, 01:21:56 PM
Quote from: Jihelu on March 22, 2016, 01:18:30 PM
If Nak doesn't get zombie rushed in the next two weeks I'll be dissapointed.
Get used to disappointment [/dreadpiratetalk].
No more Nilazi for the time being, remember?
There's almost certainly still some in-game. And still some people with spec-apps that were accepted that haven't even gotten in game yet.
Hate to burst your bubble, but spec apps that are approved but not in play are invalid now.
I had a spec app elementalist and was told I had to change it to one of the aspects of approved Mage, or do a new special app all together. So staff is working with you, but you can't bank old approved classes that no longer exist.
Shitty how they're saying something that implies the opposite then.
Well, do remember this is Asmoth telling you. I would get that confirmed by Staff.
It was in the FAQ. Asmoth is correct.
Quote from: Rathustra on March 21, 2016, 04:23:32 PM
What about my special application/extended subguild application that I have not yet made in-game?
Please send in a question request, quoting your special application request number. We will work with you to adjust and re-approve your application with one of the new subguilds.
Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 22, 2016, 01:30:34 PM
Well, do remember this is Asmoth telling you. I would get that confirmed by Staff.
Ye of little faith!
Quote from: manonfire on March 22, 2016, 01:07:03 PM
Quote from: Large Hero on March 22, 2016, 12:30:49 PM
Quote from: manonfire on March 22, 2016, 11:58:20 AM
Much like the sorcerer change - my question remains basically the same - why didn't you guys do something fun with it? Why not a phased change based on player reactions in a plotline? You don't have to involve players with changes in code - it is, after all, your playground, but why wouldn't you want the playerbase be a witness to the change IC'ly?
I can only come up with two answers.
Could staff have tied this into an IC event? Yes.
Did they have to? No. It isn't a fault that they did not.
There is nothing intrinsically wrong with changing the code or balance of the game without tying it to an IC event.
I really don't have to say anything besides the above sentence, but:
I find the attitude you're displaying here weird and aggressive. "You didn't take a potential opportunity here, therefore you're apathetic or lazy."
Because deciding to change something without optionally tying it into an IC event means you are apathetic or lazy. What?
Regardless of whether or not you agree with the changes, staff has invested time and effort into changing something. It's the opposite of apathy or laziness. Even if you feel it isn't good enough for you.
I realize that changing the way magick guilds work is different than just altering numbers in melee combat code. I realize there was more potential here to tie it into IC events.
But, shit - this kind of "not good enough! Therefore worthy of complaint!" attitude is fucking poisonous.
Skipping over all your strawman static,
Granted, there's nothing intrinsically wrong with not tying code changes to an IC event, but throttle back a half-second and be cognizant of what type of game we're playing here. It's a high-fantasy sandbox where players come to create and reside in an alternate reality because it's fucking fun.
This is a huge change. There's literally three entire guilds disappearing from the game. No more Elkrans. No more Drovians. No more Nilazi. Coupled with that, the basic paradigm of what elementalists (which comprised basically half of the available guilds) are is changing. Half the guilds in the game will never be the same again.
Moreso than the sorcerer guild revamp, these changes beg for a spectacular shift IG or an RPT.
I'm disappointed there wasn't one.
I agree that a change like this is very conducive to an IC event. Such IC events are usually fun. Yes, the point of the game is to have fun. It would have been good to pair it with an IC event.
Saying that choosing not to do so can be nothing other than apathy or laziness is just not constructive and is downright clownish.
Throttle back for half a second and be cognizant of that.
If something is being removed because it was decided it doesn't fit the game's theme, it doesn't make sense to immortalize its removal as part of the setting's history. We didn't need a magickal calamity to explain why sandwiches were removed and can no longer be made. We didn't need a momentous natural disaster to explain why spikey wristwraps that slash your opponent automatically vanished into thin air. We didn't need an HRPT to mark the removal of sunslits with glass lenses. We didn't need a mysterious, global epidemic disease to explain why people can no longer create explosive traps or search for hidden doors. If it's decided that something shouldn't exist and should never have existed within the game, you retcon. You don't immortalize.
Quote from: hyzhenhok on March 22, 2016, 02:04:40 PM
If something is being removed because it was decided it doesn't fit the game's theme, it doesn't make sense to immortalize its removal as part of the setting's history. We didn't need a magickal calamity to explain why sandwiches were removed and can no longer be made. We didn't need a momentous natural disaster to explain why spikey wristwraps that slash your opponent automatically vanished into thin air. We didn't need an HRPT to mark the removal of sunslits with glass lenses. We didn't need a mysterious, global epidemic disease to explain why people can no longer create explosive traps or search for hidden doors. If it's decided that something shouldn't exist and should never have existed within the game, you retcon. You don't immortalize.
That's a fair outlook. I think this could have been paired with an IC event, certainly. It does have much more potential IC tie-in than retconning sandwiches, though I know you weren't making a serious example. I also understand reasons for choosing not to immortalize something.
My main issue with manonfire's comments is that there's no reason to be insulting about staff's choice. Disagreement is allowed, sure, and even healthy. But there's no reason to be calling genuine effort (even if you don't feel it was good enough for you) the product of laziness and apathy. It's a poisonous atmosphere that we don't need around here.
We weren't told that full Elementalists and sorcerers were unthemely and required a retcon. Staff specifically said full sorcerers were removed because they were too powerful and required too much oversight to throw that power around in a themely way, so that they would be being culled to take a bit of the workload off while still not removing something so themely from the game. They haven't exactly stated the reasons behind this change, and I'm not saying they're the same ones, but I don't think Full Elementalists are being shattered to pieces because it's decided they didn't fit the theme or gameworld.
Quote from: Xalle on March 22, 2016, 08:52:40 AM
Quote from: Rathustra on March 21, 2016, 04:35:37 PM
We are looking to cycle in the spells from the drovian/elkrosian/nilazi trees into the game in compelling and thematically interesting ways.
This response misses the mark in a way that surprises me, coming from staff.
It's not a fondness for the spells. It's a fondness for the
roles. The flavor.
Even if you took away that one spell that defines Drovian's usefulness, I'd still want Drovians. Even if Elkran sub-guilds were basically just copies of another element sub-guild, I'd still want Elkrans. Even if Nilazi were split/nerfed to the point they'd never really be a threat to a city, I'd still want Nilazi.
+1 MM
Quote from: Marauder Moe on March 22, 2016, 02:15:05 PM
Quote from: Xalle on March 22, 2016, 08:52:40 AM
Quote from: Rathustra on March 21, 2016, 04:35:37 PM
We are looking to cycle in the spells from the drovian/elkrosian/nilazi trees into the game in compelling and thematically interesting ways.
This response misses the mark in a way that surprises me, coming from staff.
It's not a fondness for the spells. It's a fondness for the roles. The flavor.
Even if you took away that one spell that defines Drovian's usefulness, I'd still want Drovians. Even if Elkran sub-guilds were basically just copies of another element sub-guild, I'd still want Elkrans. Even if Nilazi were split/nerfed to the point they'd never really be a threat to a city, I'd still want Nilazi.
+2 MM
Heck - even my GDB avatar is a Nilazi - need I say more?
The big loss in Nilaz's removal is the same one as the sorcerer change, but now on a somewhat larger scale: These roles were natural antagonists to the establishment, and powerful or almost-powerful enough to make such things possible and inclusive. They could be real, believable characters that were naturally just enemies of the state, and struggles and conflict surrounded them naturally.
Removing the options for those roles is another step towards stagnant, not-much-to-do behavior. Not a statement to exaggerate into me making a hyperbolic statement, but not a statement to be disregarded either. It's happening.
I am all for forcing players to be more creative in their villainy instead of just relying on "ho ho I have zombies."
Nilaz was a cool concept that often fell flat in player hands. It's emblematic of why I don't like magick as a theme - it encourages players to rely on code to do "Villainous" things and made for lazy RP.
Hopefully with the next wave of Guild changes mundanes will be able to accomplish more.
Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 22, 2016, 02:25:02 PM
I am all for forcing players to be more creative in their villainy instead of just relying on "ho ho I have zombies."
Nilaz was a cool concept that often fell flat in player hands.
Sure. I can shoot arrows at salters now. I can do the traditional raiding and villainy I've always done. But no, this is not forcing people to be creative, it's removing certain tools from your disposal in doing it.
I have never played a Nilazi. I wanted to give one a shot, because of this very antagonist point of view. The more we have, the more content is in the game to be a driving force. You say it fell flat too often; I say I've seen at least a dozen plots over my time here dedicated solely to one of these. You can make it a 'ratio' if you want to, but that's not very effective; every class and role in the game is dependent on 'coming to fruition', and success rates vary from person to person and time to time.
edit: Because people are being stingy, yes, a dozen is an estimate. One every year to two years over my time being here, essentially...though in olden times, it was usually a full on sorcerer and not a nilazi.
Quote from: Marauder Moe on March 22, 2016, 02:15:05 PM
Quote from: Xalle on March 22, 2016, 08:52:40 AM
Quote from: Rathustra on March 21, 2016, 04:35:37 PM
We are looking to cycle in the spells from the drovian/elkrosian/nilazi trees into the game in compelling and thematically interesting ways.
This response misses the mark in a way that surprises me, coming from staff.
It's not a fondness for the spells. It's a fondness for the roles. The flavor.
Even if you took away that one spell that defines Drovian's usefulness, I'd still want Drovians. Even if Elkran sub-guilds were basically just copies of another element sub-guild, I'd still want Elkrans. Even if Nilazi were split/nerfed to the point they'd never really be a threat to a city, I'd still want Nilazi.
It misses the mark because it's been taken out of context of how I originally posted it.
A Nilazi could fall flat and still have a plot dedicated to it. They needed destroying, after all, no matter what we thought of the RP.
I'm personally hoping that Void Elementalists make a return, but with a more thematically coherent skill list. That seems to have been their primary weakness in the eyes of staff - that their skills were cobbled together and often invoked themes only tangentially related to the actual element of Nilaz. They're Void mages, not necromancers, even though a lot tended to be played as such.
I've thought about this, about why I'm not feeling too happy with this change. And personally its because I'm not very good at creating concepts. My concept forms as I go.
The benefit of the previous magickal guilds was that I would have the whole skill list available, and if my char would go into a certain direction, that aspect would be available.
Now, I have to pick an aspect in advance without really knowing whether my char would go into that direction. I'm basically forced to choose a direction which limits me in my roleplay. That's just a personal thing, not saying this counts for every player.
I just like to have a bit more freedom when it comes to developing a character.
when sweeping changes are made to guilds, you know what i do?
i just keep calm and
(http://www.mememaker.net/static/images/memes/4341819.jpg)
So, I've had a night to sleep on all this, here are my thoughts. I could probably write a lot more about it, but I have work to do today, and seeing the defensive and closed off nature of responses thus far I just feel an overwhelming sense of futility in trying to debate this subject so I'll save my breath.
The Addition of Elementalist Subguilds
A fantastic addition, something that people have been suggesting for 10+ years. It'll add interesting and nuanced options for people who want to play secret magickers, or people who want a taste of magick to their otherwise mundane role. I want to lead with the positive, because I would not want any of the staff to feel that this significant add to the game is in anyway unappreciated.
The removal of Void Elementalists
This is by far the worst part of these changes. Nilazi were a terrifying and sinister force in the world, and spin it however you want, if the guild is removed the lore, terror and intrigue of it dies with it. The brief reasoning for why it was removed is shallow, and leaves me with nothing but disappointment. We all are losing something great by removing the guild entirely. I would feel vastly better if Nilazi were transitioned to Karma 8, special application status, or something that could be fully acquired in-game through IC actions. In fact, just this tweak alone would significantly change my sentiment regarding these changes from extremely negative to only slightly negative.
The removal of Drov and Elkros
Much the same as the Void Elementalists, but admittedly to a lesser degree. Much will depend on what staff decide to do with their catalog of spells.
The removal of full elementalist roles of the other elements
Another significant removal of something cool from the game. The fact that I will never again see a full whiran, rukkian, vivaduan, or krathi is really a lot more upsetting to me than I would've ever thought. This has changed magick into nothing more than a gimmick. A small bag of tricks, attached to an otherwise normal person. I would be okay with this if elementalist subguilds were able to 'grow' and acquire other spells through some kind of IC actions, and perhaps eventually become full elementalists once again in rare circumstances.
What these changes say about our staff's philosophy on magick and it's place in the game
These changes were not made by some dictator from up high. Staff work as a team. If the majority, or even a significant minority of staff disagreed with these changes, they wouldn't have happened. So in essence, what this signals to me is that staff want to see a major, systematic reduction of magick available to PCs, and the setting of Zalanthas as a whole.
Magick is a polarizing topic in this community. Some have drawn an analogy that it's like two opposing political parties, and in many ways it is. What these changes signal to me is that the "government" of Armageddon is controlled by a different philosophical party than me. It signals to me that any changes I was hoping would be made to improve magick and it's place in the world will not happen, and will in fact bury it further. I guess that's potentially the most disappointing part of all for me. And the responses that staff have made when others voice their disappointment certainly isn't encouraging me to feel better about this.
Quote from: Rathustra on March 22, 2016, 02:34:47 PM
Quote from: Marauder Moe on March 22, 2016, 02:15:05 PM
Quote from: Xalle on March 22, 2016, 08:52:40 AM
Quote from: Rathustra on March 21, 2016, 04:35:37 PM
We are looking to cycle in the spells from the drovian/elkrosian/nilazi trees into the game in compelling and thematically interesting ways.
This response misses the mark in a way that surprises me, coming from staff.
It's not a fondness for the spells. It's a fondness for the roles. The flavor.
Even if you took away that one spell that defines Drovian's usefulness, I'd still want Drovians. Even if Elkran sub-guilds were basically just copies of another element sub-guild, I'd still want Elkrans. Even if Nilazi were split/nerfed to the point they'd never really be a threat to a city, I'd still want Nilazi.
It misses the mark because it's been taken out of context of how I originally posted it.
Well, it wasn't me that quoted it out of context.
Regardless, I stand by my statement. Those elements may be the half-elven stepchildren of Armageddon magick, but they're still children. They've been part of the game for more than 15 years and in my opinion the roles do add something to the world. Give them at least
something to be played as, rather than stuffing them in the closet entirely.
One other thought that staff might want to consider is the collateral damage of this change on the balance of the Allanaki noble houses.
House Oash hired mages in the past, and this was somewhat balanced by the fact that these mages couldn't do very much in a mundane sense. No social power, and without mundanes to work with, pretty limited military strength. This is obviously no longer the case. Oash is now a clan with much larger clan caps than anyone else, and the ability to tap into magick on top of that. Borsail and Fale are going to be greatly unbalanced as a result, with less clan members and obviously less powerful ones at their disposal.
Probably going to remove Oash mage circles.
Quote from: Marauder Moe on March 22, 2016, 02:55:02 PM
Quote from: Rathustra on March 22, 2016, 02:34:47 PM
Quote from: Marauder Moe on March 22, 2016, 02:15:05 PM
Quote from: Xalle on March 22, 2016, 08:52:40 AM
Quote from: Rathustra on March 21, 2016, 04:35:37 PM
We are looking to cycle in the spells from the drovian/elkrosian/nilazi trees into the game in compelling and thematically interesting ways.
This response misses the mark in a way that surprises me, coming from staff.
It's not a fondness for the spells. It's a fondness for the roles. The flavor.
Even if you took away that one spell that defines Drovian's usefulness, I'd still want Drovians. Even if Elkran sub-guilds were basically just copies of another element sub-guild, I'd still want Elkrans. Even if Nilazi were split/nerfed to the point they'd never really be a threat to a city, I'd still want Nilazi.
It misses the mark because it's been taken out of context of how I originally posted it.
Well, it wasn't me that quoted it out of context.
Regardless, I stand by my statement. Those elements may be the half-elven stepchildren of Armageddon magick, but they're still children. They've been part of the game for more than 15 years and in my opinion the roles do add something to the world. Give them at least something to be played as, rather than stuffing them in the closet entirely.
Argh ok yeah sorry that may have been lazy quoting on my part. What I was trying to short handedly convey while doing other things, was that I'm optimistic that the flavour and some of the interesting, unique concepts that were in some of those guilds/spells can be imparted/reflected/introduced in different ways. I'm really shit at the GDB. :-[
Quote from: MeTekillot on March 22, 2016, 03:00:39 PM
Probably going to remove Oash mage circles.
I don't think so.
A Gemmed is still a Gemmed - disgusting, discriminated against, and lacking in social mobility. They can only spar with themselves or in the wilderness. They might have more of a mundane oomph to them by virtue of the Guild, but it's too early to say whether they'll be more powerful. They're certainly not going to be as Magickally empowered on an individual basis.
Oash was always "overpowered" on paper, but IC social pressure and OOC staff oversight kept them from running roughshod over the City. I anticipate this continuing.
I mean they'll remove player-populated mage circles, not retcon them, like the Elites, or the Wyverns, or the Fale guard.
Character creation options aren't updating for me, and I have logged in and out as my character. Most of the magick guilds have been removed, but I randomly still have shadow elementalist for some reason. There's still no subguild list.
Quote from: MeTekillot on March 22, 2016, 03:04:51 PM
I mean they'll remove player-populated mage circles, not retcon them, like the Elites, or the Wyverns, or the Fale guard.
Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 22, 2016, 03:03:18 PM
I don't think so.
On an unrelated note, I'm really kind of amused that players like Wizturbo and Vwest and myself have looked at this and come to similar conclusions despite coming from radically opposed viewpoints. Gives me hope that this might work after all.
I do worry that this is going to make Magickers more quantitatively common if not individually more powerful. Ironically it's made me really want to play certain kind of magickers so I can kill them better.
QuoteI do worry that this is going to make Magickers more quantitatively common if not individually more powerful.
I see that as a relative certainty, which is my major gripe. Not because I have to compete with them. Not because I think they'll all be murderous. But magick being around more often just isn't my cup of tea. Magick being facilitated into spreading into more places isn't my cup of tea. And setting things up so that documentation of the game is no longer logical (i.e. the hiring of mages) doesn't make sense.
Prior, the lack of hiring mages was justified. And the lack of mage skillset, to me, was always a sign that there was a certain degree of focus required from a mage. Something that kept them specialized, so that they could do other things (subguilds), but not to the degree of anyone else. With this change though...why would you -not- hire that guy who can do everything this guy can, but then also has spellcraft(even minor) to boot?
This seems to me the logical predecessor to a loosening of the reins on magick and a precursor to a rise in prevalence of magickal roleplay to the average mundane.
Damn guys. Settle down.
I for one am going to avoid the GDB for awhile I think. Let some of the dust settle and then revisit the subject in a few weeks or months when the wounds are a little less raw.
I don't think Magick is going to be noticeably more common after the initial "toe dipping" players will do.
Quote from: Marauder Moe on March 22, 2016, 02:55:02 PM
Regardless, I stand by my statement. Those elements may be the half-elven stepchildren of Armageddon magick, but they're still children. They've been part of the game for more than 15 years and in my opinion the roles do add something to the world. Give them at least something to be played as, rather than stuffing them in the closet entirely.
To paraphrase what you're saying here is that once something goes into the game it should never get looked at again - and if something makes it into the game, it can't ever be altered in any significant way. ???
Quote from: hyzhenhok on March 22, 2016, 02:04:40 PM
If something is being removed because it was decided it doesn't fit the game's theme, it doesn't make sense to immortalize its removal as part of the setting's history. We didn't need a magickal calamity to explain why sandwiches were removed and can no longer be made. We didn't need a momentous natural disaster to explain why spikey wristwraps that slash your opponent automatically vanished into thin air. We didn't need an HRPT to mark the removal of sunslits with glass lenses. We didn't need a mysterious, global epidemic disease to explain why people can no longer create explosive traps or search for hidden doors. If it's decided that something shouldn't exist and should never have existed within the game, you retcon. You don't immortalize.
I'm not sure where you are going with this?
A magick class =/= Sandwich.
Are you saying we don't need an ic reason because it was retconn'd? Because it wasn't retconned and from what I read they don't intend on retconning.
Quote from: seidhr on March 22, 2016, 03:44:05 PM
Quote from: Marauder Moe on March 22, 2016, 02:55:02 PM
Regardless, I stand by my statement. Those elements may be the half-elven stepchildren of Armageddon magick, but they're still children. They've been part of the game for more than 15 years and in my opinion the roles do add something to the world. Give them at least something to be played as, rather than stuffing them in the closet entirely.
To paraphrase what you're saying here is that once something goes into the game it should never get looked at again - and if something makes it into the game, it can't ever be altered in any significant way. ???
I think he's more saying that if you have a recipe for a certain type of food that a lot of people are enjoying, messing with spices and additions and sideplates is safer than changing a portion or preparation step or whatever about the main dish. Like changing an ingredient for ye olde reliable white bread into a different kind of flour, and then saying be patient and the new dish will grow on you, but you needed to do it because you wanted that particular component of the recipe to have more of a signature kick.
This change is not being retconned in. The changes you encounter in-game will be in-game phenomena. How your PCs react to this should be based on their IC motivations, understandings and attitudes.
I'm not sure I really get the recipe analogy.
Quote from: Rathustra on March 22, 2016, 03:51:50 PM
This change is not being retconned in. The changes you encounter in-game will be in-game phenomena. How your PCs react to this should be based on their IC motivations, understandings and attitudes.
What he said.
That being said, even though if you bother to read what I type (Why would you) I see to be against this.
I'm not though.
I am /sad/ about never being able to be a Nilazi. Though maybe they will come back in some crazy way or I'll be able to finally make my evil zombie character some time in the future, but I need to focus on the now more.
Quote from: seidhr on March 22, 2016, 03:52:35 PM
I'm not sure I really get the recipe analogy.
That's probably because I think I'm great at analogies but actually terrible, by judgment of the reception of them.
I think the statement being made was that it's been there for 15+ years because it was a winning element (pun!) of the game, otherwise it would have been withdrawn soon after going in due to not being received well.
Of course...that doesn't seem to go over well. So maybe you're actually fixing something everyone hated at the time. But that's from before my time.
Quote from: seidhr on March 22, 2016, 03:52:35 PM
I'm not sure I really get the recipe analogy.
I think the gist of the recipe analogy is that Colonel Sanders would risk an uproar and some really, really unhappy customers if the secret spices were suddenly changed, but it would maybe be a safer choice to add a new combo meal if he wanted to play around with different tastes.
Edit: I don't even eat chicken. I don't know why the first thing that came to mind was the Colonel and his chicken.
Quote from: seidhr on March 22, 2016, 03:44:05 PM
Quote from: Marauder Moe on March 22, 2016, 02:55:02 PM
Regardless, I stand by my statement. Those elements may be the half-elven stepchildren of Armageddon magick, but they're still children. They've been part of the game for more than 15 years and in my opinion the roles do add something to the world. Give them at least something to be played as, rather than stuffing them in the closet entirely.
To paraphrase what you're saying here is that once something goes into the game it should never get looked at again - and if something makes it into the game, it can't ever be altered in any significant way. ???
Come now, you know that's not what I'm saying.
I get that change sometimes has to happen. You had clear reasons for closing Tuluk: staff resource and player consolidation. Your justification for this seems to be just "they were a mess when first added to the game".
Quote from: Marauder Moe on March 22, 2016, 04:09:21 PM
Come now, you know that's not what I'm saying.
I get that change sometimes has to happen. You had clear reasons for closing Tuluk: staff resource and player consolidation. Your justification for this seems to be just "they were a mess when first added to the game".
The justification for this is more just that they don't fit with the vision of what elementalists should be, now. As has been stated numerous times, we hope to bring some particulars of what made them loved back in one form or another.
As an aside, there was a huge outcry and a lot of the same sorts of arguments from some of the playerbase when Tuluk was closed - you may recall.
I had a lot of fun, personally, playing a Tan Muark back in their hey day when they had the waterslides and the margarita machines in the Blue Jug, and a big part of me was sad to see them go - but the goal state for the game is a moving target. Break eggs to make omelettes, back to the recipes, eh?
I understand why you're being vague, but I wish we could at least know whether you're planning to make new mini-nilazi/drovian/elkran subguilds, or if you're going to roll these spells into the subguilds you've already created, or create something entirely new that incorporates some aspects of these guilds but is different from anything we have seen before or are likely imagining.
Quote from: seidhr on March 22, 2016, 04:25:01 PM
Break eggs to make omelettes, back to the recipes, eh?
...I have an egg intolerance and don't eat them either.
Food analogies are stupid. :P
Quote from: seidhr on March 22, 2016, 04:25:01 PMThe justification for this is more just that they don't fit with the vision of what elementalists should be, now. As has been stated numerous times, we hope to bring some particulars of what made them loved back in one form or another.
I don't see any parts about your vision for what elementalists should be that seem particularly incompatible with those elements. Is there more to it?
Also, again, they aren't loved because of "particulars". They're loved because of a theme.
Some additional thoughts, now that I've at least allowed myself to consider character creation opportunities... This is going to have a massively opposite effect than what people think.
Magick is going to be more important, and more overpowered than ever.
Mundane classes have actually always been the counter to magickers. A ranger with their bow is just about any mage's bane out in the desert. The assassin in the city is the same. Now that paradigm shifts, and instead magicker versions of a mundane class will just be at an entirely different level than their mundane counterparts. No mundane warrior will be able to match a Warrior/Rukkian. No Assassin will ever be better than an Assassin with magick at their disposal. Magickers are now super mundanes, rather than mages.
The power economy of the game is being completely re-written, if you don't have magick, you need to tremble in fear because you're a second class citizen even at your own profession. In many ways, elementalists are now super charged Templars in terms of their coded power, albeit without any of their social or political authority. It's going to be absolutely nuts how dangerous some of these combinations are, and how easily they'll be able to remain concealed seeing as the main sources of magickal espionage are now gone.
I guess magicker hatred will finally be well founded, as they'll be superior to a mundane in every way when it comes to power.
I don't think it's safe to speculate about what will or won't happen... everyone thought pickpockets getting unlatch was going to result in a veritable "Armageddon" of thievery and new paranoia about thieves (me included), but it never did.
I'm interested about all the open questions here. If subguild elementalists become more common, will templars be able to detect them? Will it be harder to live in the city as one of these characters? Will there be an explosion in the gemmed population, or an exodus from Allanak? Who can say??
Uhh. Mages were already better than the mundanes wherever their skill sets matched up. Now they're just a different kind of better. In some cases, losing the diversity of spells actually makes them worse at certain things than they were before...
Also based on my limited experience with the spice in the game, you could make a lot of the same arguments about the overpoweredness of someone walking around with spice to snort.
Quote from: CodeMaster on March 22, 2016, 05:01:46 PM
I'm interested about all the open questions here. If subguild elementalists become more common, will templars be able to detect them? Will it be harder to live in the city as one of these characters? Will there be an explosion in the gemmed population, or an exodus from Allanak? Who can say??
Find out IC
I confess to being strangely drawn to click on any thread in which BadSkeelz was the last comment.
Quote from: Miradus on March 22, 2016, 05:07:12 PM
I confess to being strangely drawn to click on any thread in which BadSkeelz was the last comment.
Because he's the asshole we deserve, he's the one we need right now. So we'll read him. Because he can take it. Because he's not a mage lover. He's a text-based guardian, a watchful poster. A dark asshole. He's Bad Skeelz.
<3
Quote from: Incognito on March 22, 2016, 02:20:39 PM
Quote from: Marauder Moe on March 22, 2016, 02:15:05 PM
Quote from: Xalle on March 22, 2016, 08:52:40 AM
Quote from: Rathustra on March 21, 2016, 04:35:37 PM
We are looking to cycle in the spells from the drovian/elkrosian/nilazi trees into the game in compelling and thematically interesting ways.
This response misses the mark in a way that surprises me, coming from staff.
It's not a fondness for the spells. It's a fondness for the roles. The flavor.
Even if you took away that one spell that defines Drovian's usefulness, I'd still want Drovians. Even if Elkran sub-guilds were basically just copies of another element sub-guild, I'd still want Elkrans. Even if Nilazi were split/nerfed to the point they'd never really be a threat to a city, I'd still want Nilazi.
+2 MM
Heck - even my GDB avatar is a Nilazi - need I say more?
+ 3. As character hooks, they provide a lot. There has been a lot of stuff in game revolving around Nilaz plots, demons and history. Why...eliminate all that?
If Drovians had less utility than other mages, than I think the answer is to develop them, not erase them.
Elkros - sounded pretty awesome. But a lot of overlap with whira. But dark is not just the absence of light and has a place in the elements.
Quote from: wizturbo on March 22, 2016, 04:52:01 PM
Some additional thoughts, now that I've at least allowed myself to consider character creation opportunities... This is going to have a massively opposite effect than what people think.
Magick is going to be more important, and more overpowered than ever.
Mundane classes have actually always been the counter to magickers. A ranger with their bow is just about any mage's bane out in the desert. The assassin in the city is the same. Now that paradigm shifts, and instead magicker versions of a mundane class will just be at an entirely different level than their mundane counterparts. No mundane warrior will be able to match a Warrior/Rukkian. No Assassin will ever be better than an Assassin with magick at their disposal. Magickers are now super mundanes, rather than mages.
The power economy of the game is being completely re-written, if you don't have magick, you need to tremble in fear because you're a second class citizen even at your own profession. In many ways, elementalists are now super charged Templars in terms of their coded power, albeit without any of their social or political authority. It's going to be absolutely nuts how dangerous some of these combinations are, and how easily they'll be able to remain concealed seeing as the main sources of magickal espionage are now gone.
I guess magicker hatred will finally be well founded, as they'll be superior to a mundane in every way when it comes to power.
I think this is seriously the wrong way to look at the whole situation, I mean, I -understand why-, but still.
i've said it several times, it should be looking at the theme, and what fits. I -hugely- support this change for all sorts of thematic reasons, and concept reasons, the capacity for more character concepts that thematically work with zalanthas is now -huge-.
its also stated that this is the beginning - im pretty certain adjustments will be made, and we also have to remember that karma is a mark of staff trust - and if people do things that show that trust isn't founded..well yeah.
Seriously people, see these new subguilds, possible mixtures, as a part of a -storytelling- tool and Roleplay tool. Worrying about the power and one character being better then another? im pretty sure thats what has made the whole idea of 'omgs, magicks is better then mundanes!'
Every character will be unique in one way or another and have abilities others may not have, its important to stop looking at power and strength -yes, theres going to be some ridic combinations, and theres nothing stopping people from doing stuff with them.
but for heaven's sake, we're roleplayers. Lets focus on making this fun instead of fretting about the power, i mean.
its starting to feel like NO one trusts their fellow player on arm. wtfs up with that?
Large numbers of people throwing cantrips or a few spells around no better fits the Armageddon theme than a slightly-lesser number of people throwing many more spells around. The fear is that this change will make magic common in the world, dilute its scariness and mystique, and eventually erode the social constraints that have been placed on it (which just feeds back in to making it more common).
This is conjecture. I'm afraid it might be true in the short term as well as the long term, but we won't really know how its affected the game for weeks.
Maybe we're going back in time to Tor warriormages.
Finally, Tor will be restored to full power.
If Elkros, Drov and Nilaz were somehow out of place as full elementalist guilds, why couldn't they have a home amongst subguilds and be put together with "more oversight"?
It should be pretty easy to do a subguild cut of each of these guilds, and have some cool and terrifying combinations. The idea of a mundane mixed with Nilaz is even more scary than normal Nilazi, which I like. And the same is true for Drov and Elkros to some degree as well.
Quote from: RogueGunslinger on March 22, 2016, 05:03:15 PM
Uhh. Mages were already better than the mundanes wherever their skill sets matched up. Now they're just a different kind of better. In some cases, losing the diversity of spells actually makes them worse at certain things than they were before...
No. They had more power than mundanes in a general kind of way, but magickers were not just across-the-board superior at very individual thing. If you wanted to be the best swordsman or archer or thief, the answer was not "mage." Now it is. Now that's the answer to the best of anything. They're now mundane+1 characters, it's pretty self-evident.
Being a mundane is now objectively inferior where game mechanics are concerned, and it also seems to have become infinitely easier to avoid the social ramifications of being a mage because it can much more readily be kept secret, so the pariah aspect of it is probably also much reduced as you can easily go through life without being sussed out as you don't rely on magick for little everyday things. That's not a bad thing as such, but it certainly is a thing that makes the social stigma of playing a mage less perilous.
The best assassin in the city, he's gonna be a magicker. The best ranger in the region, that's a wiggler. The best thief around, it'll be a guy who's a pickpocket with an agility buff. Mages are #1 in every field now and appear to have become much easier to fit into any and every aspect of the game because they get to also be full realized versions of any given guild.
Quote from: Warsong on March 22, 2016, 07:20:05 PM
Quote from: RogueGunslinger on March 22, 2016, 05:03:15 PM
Uhh. Mages were already better than the mundanes wherever their skill sets matched up. Now they're just a different kind of better. In some cases, losing the diversity of spells actually makes them worse at certain things than they were before...
No. They had more power than mundanes in a general kind of way, but magickers were not just across-the-board superior at very individual thing. If you wanted to be the best swordsman or archer or thief, the answer was not "mage." Now it is. Now that's the answer to the best of anything. They're now mundane+1 characters, it's pretty self-evident.
Being a mundane is now objectively inferior where game mechanics are concerned, and it also seems to have become infinitely easier to avoid the social ramifications of being a mage because it can much more readily be kept secret, so the pariah aspect of it is probably also much reduced as you can easily go through life using very little magick at times when it'd be inconvenient.
The best assassin in the city, he's gonna be a magicker. The best ranger in the region, that's a wiggler. The best thief around, it'll be a guy who's a pickpocket with an agility buff. Mages are #1 in every field now and appear to have become much easier to fit into any and every aspect of the game because they get to also be full realized versions of any given guild.
As they should be.
Okay, I stayed out of this until now because I'm super opinionated and GDB bullshit is actually what makes me quit playing every time I quit playing. But here's my piece...
I'm a magick hater. Old-school magick hater. Hated magick since I started playing this game way back when. Badskeelz doesn't even come close to hating magick as much as me. Fuck magick. If magick was removed completely from the game I'd bust a nut with sheer joy. Did I say fuck magick? Cause fuck magick.
Okay, now that you know that about me (if you didn't already) let me continue... This is how magick should be. Why can't a warrior be a mage? A ranger? A thief? Are they going to be the best in the world at that? Yep. Because they should be. Is it fair? No, and it shouldn't be. My only hope is that this actually drives an IG fear and loathing of magick. I hope because now, knowing no matter how hard you train you ain't shit against a magicker, I hope people really FEAR and HATE magick.
It just occurred to me that this change might facilitate a concept I liked but was having trouble building.
Hmm.
Yes, I agree. Magick should be unfair. You shouldn't be a chanting cleric with a withered body just because you know magick spells. Elementalists are just random people who happen to get a link to magick. It's going to come to be that some bone-sword chopping badass gets cursed with a link to Suk-Krath, and instead of offing himself or ignoring it forever, he's going to start to dabble and become a flame-sword flinging whirlwind of death. Magickers are going to be decidedly dangerous instead of a guy you know you can catch off-guard because you know magickers have no skills besides magick. They're going to be feared. And everyone is either going to go the doc-deigned way of being afraid of the unknown in magickers and their superstitions, to a resentfulness of mages because you know that because you're not a mage, you're not as good as a mage. And you can't roll up a grief ranger to go magicker hunting to feel like it's fair. Life isn't fair, and neither should Armageddon be.
Until the full guild revamp is in, such claims that mundane-magesub > anything else is just guessing. We really have no idea what is coming, and how it will balance things, and I believe it is very unfair to condemn staff for this move until we've seen it in action. I think if people will take a step back, lower the cynicism a little, and give it a try, then cooler heads will prevail. Some of the naysayers may even like the change after giving it a shot. We might as well be screaming about how bad the Stanley Cup is going to suck, without knowing how the games will play out.
And if this change does end in mages being a frightening force that has an advantage over mundanes, I'm honestly not going to be too torn up over it. It'd really help instill that ideal that magick is to be feared, when one knows that a mage can take your cookies and eat them while you watch. The subs are gates behind karma, which is supposed to keep such powerful combinations out of the hands of players who don't fully understand how bad they could imbalance things with irresponsible play. If they get out of line, that option won't be their option anymore.
Overpopulation is not likely to be a problem as well. It was already stated earlier in this thread that the gick population will be monitored. A lot of people will roll up mundanes as well, because it's simply their concept and what they want to play, not because they want a coded advantage to lord over the wastes. The social stigma of gickery itself is also a reason to believe that not everyone you encounter will be a mage sub.
tldr; Give it time, trust your staff and fellow players, and have fun role-playing. :)
QuoteAnd you can't roll up a grief ranger to go magicker hunting to feel like it's fair.
Sure I can.
Quote from: Warsong on March 22, 2016, 07:20:05 PM
Quote from: RogueGunslinger on March 22, 2016, 05:03:15 PM
Uhh. Mages were already better than the mundanes wherever their skill sets matched up. Now they're just a different kind of better. In some cases, losing the diversity of spells actually makes them worse at certain things than they were before...
No. They had more power than mundanes in a general kind of way, but magickers were not just across-the-board superior at very individual thing. If you wanted to be the best swordsman or archer or thief, the answer was not "mage." Now it is. Now that's the answer to the best of anything.
Being a mundane is now objectively inferior where game mechanics are concerned, and it seems to have become infinitely easier to avoid the social ramifications of being a mage because it can much more readily be kept secret.
The best assassin in the city, he's gonna be a magicker. The best ranger in the region, that's a wiggler. The best thief around, it'll be a guy who's a pickpocket with an agility buff. Mages are #1 in every field now.
Magickers were not just across the board superior at every little thing and I didn't say that. The best guild at melee was never guild_warrior though. Not even a little bit. The best in melee were ALWAYS Krathis/rukkians. The best Assassins were always vivaduans/nilazi/drovians. The best burglar/spy will always be a whiran/drovian or a psionicist. And all of these classes would make for utterly devastating assassins.
Truth be told? The best "assassin" in the city is going to be a player who knows wtf they're doing and is going to have nothing to do with skill power and everything to do with meta game knowlege of how skills work. Also roleplay. For instance, a Templar would make the best assassin. And after all your warrior/krathi can be butt-fucked by a rangers arrow just like anyone else.
Objectively inferior where game mechanics are concerned? That's an absurd statement because there are WAY too many factors in what determines superiority. One thing might be great at or against something else, but entirely useless in other contexts. I would take a warrior/slipknife over a warrior/invis mage any fucking day. Why? Because mundane stealth code is powerful as fuck, and there's a slew of interesting skills that come with them.
You seem to be upset that your ranger/slipknife can't compete with a ranger/vivaduan. But your ranger couldn't compete with a full vivaduan either.
Quote from: Armaddict on March 22, 2016, 07:41:47 PM
QuoteAnd you can't roll up a grief ranger to go magicker hunting to feel like it's fair.
Sure I can.
You can, but you can't KNOW that the magickers you're plinking after are totally unable to detect you because you know that Vivaduans don't get detect_hidden. You're always going to be wary, like you should be.
I think there will be a number of people checking out the new subguilds, like how there was a rash of drovians when they dropped two karma, but I think overall the numbers will eventually settle down, like they did with drovians.
Rogue mages, once they are discovered are probably alone. If they're not alone, but make a group of two or more magickers, the Powers that Be will likely feel threatened when they find out. There's sure to be some kind of plot to follow to deal with the mage or mages, which probably isn't going to end well for magickers.
The largest drawback of playing a mage was always the isolation. Sure there are niche roles for mages in Allanak with Oash or other clans however being a gemmed mage is still isolated and excludes mages from most clan roleplay in some way. Sure they'll be powerful but they'll also be less involved than other characters, rogues hiding their power and being fearful of their secret getting out that others will shun or try to kill them because they are a mage.
Sure they'll have a lot of coded power to be the best but they won't be utilized for this, they'll be demonized.
Quote from: MeTekillot on March 22, 2016, 07:42:34 PM
Quote from: Armaddict on March 22, 2016, 07:41:47 PM
QuoteAnd you can't roll up a grief ranger to go magicker hunting to feel like it's fair.
Sure I can.
You can, but you can't KNOW that the magickers you're plinking after are totally unable to detect you because you know that Vivaduans don't get detect_hidden. You're always going to be wary, like you should be.
...from a pvp perspective, this doesn't really change much, so the above isn't real, nor sensible considering guild-sniffing will be just as easily performed as before. From a setting perspective, it potentially changes quite a bit. I say potentially because there is the possibility that everyone does everything properly and this really changes nothing. However, I see risk that it changes the frequency of magickal interaction and less possibly, makes it -even harder- to sustain the documentation on the attitudes towards magick.
You insist it will make people fear magick more. This community, however, for the past while, has shown great reluctance in engaging in player versus player mentalities, even when those mentalities are not taken the point of actual killing. You can visibly see some players trying to be the change to counteract that, and they get treated pretty harshly. I think there will be more apathy and more overt friendliness. Not in the short term, when everyone is hyperaware, but the long term, after everyone has settled and said 'Nope! No problems caused, back to business as usual!'.
What it comes down to is that I see very limited benefit to the game at large due to it. There is benefit, but it's not a huge one (yay, magickers get to hunt with swords now? Yay, assassins can use sleep instead of sap?). The potential loss to me isn't worth it. It's a risk/reward paradigm, and for the sheer size of the change, the benefit just doesn't justify it. Perhaps this would be different, if there were consistent examples of staff stepping back from changes to say 'We changed our mind, this isn't work well', but that's not even happening with player made tribes or anything. Even systems organized for players to do things, which still require streamlining, are pretty much lost at this point. So knowing that the 'This isn't working, let's put it back how it was' is unlikely, the risk vs reward viewpoint becomes a larger service to have.
The only negative I can see that might be an issue with this change outside of pvp is...
If the current no magicker in anything but Oash is maintained, while people are taking touched and shards of elementalism or whatever the official term is, the clans are going to thin out because they are like eww magick, or every clan is gonna be full of rogues like half elves who hide as humans.
That's my only concern.
But I still hold faith that documentation will be changed away from total avoidance to social stigma, meaning that magickers will not be super liked but not exempted either. More of a balance versus circling the drain constantly.
Hope this doesn't get lost in the noise (aka Asmoth and Badskeelz):
In the help file on Krathi, 'agony' and 'suffering' are used synonymously, but I don't think that's intentional -- it should be 'Agony' throughout:
http://www.armageddon.org/help/view/Krathis
See, for instance:
Quote
On Zalanthas, Suk-Krath is expressed through the aspects of Devastation, Suffering and Guile.
[...]
Suffering
The Aspect of Agony describes Suk-Krath as an oppressor and antagonist of life and of the toil and exhaustion its heat instils. Krathi who are aligned with this aspect of their element are capable of inflicting all manner of suffering onto their foes - from driving life-giving water from others to engulfing their targets in flame.
Kind of hard to make clear in a quote, but I'm sure you'll see it when you go there.
Cool helpfiles by the way.
Quote from: nauta on March 22, 2016, 08:14:15 PM
Hope this doesn't get lost in the noise (aka Asmoth and Badskeelz):
In the help file on Krathi, 'agony' and 'suffering' are used synonymously, but I don't think that's intentional -- it should be 'Agony' throughout:
http://www.armageddon.org/help/view/Krathis
See, for instance:
Quote
On Zalanthas, Suk-Krath is expressed through the aspects of Devastation, Suffering and Guile.
[...]
Suffering
The Aspect of Agony describes Suk-Krath as an oppressor and antagonist of life and of the toil and exhaustion its heat instils. Krathi who are aligned with this aspect of their element are capable of inflicting all manner of suffering onto their foes - from driving life-giving water from others to engulfing their targets in flame.
Kind of hard to make clear in a quote, but I'm sure you'll see it when you go there.
Cool helpfiles by the way.
Why are we the noise? Because we fall on different sides of the debate?
Dont let it ruin your day. Just continue your own train of thought guys.
Quote from: Dar on March 22, 2016, 08:39:48 PM
Dont let it ruin your day. Just continue your own train of thought guys.
I've always appreciated your opinion Dar. This is no exception.
Question: Would staff consider letting a player pick two aspects and a mundane subguild? If it's a special application?
Edit: For clarity.
Quote from: Jingo on March 22, 2016, 09:07:58 PM
Question: Would staff consider letting a player pick two aspects and a mundane special app? If it's a special application?
Superhero's incoming to Nak!
Quote from: shadeoux on March 22, 2016, 09:24:42 PM
Quote from: Jingo on March 22, 2016, 09:07:58 PM
Question: Would staff consider letting a player pick two aspects and a mundane special app? If it's a special application?
Superhero's incoming to Nak!
Nah, they are all going to red storm because that's where the tailors are to make sweet suits...duh
Quote from: Jihelu on March 22, 2016, 03:48:07 PM
Quote from: hyzhenhok on March 22, 2016, 02:04:40 PM
If something is being removed because it was decided it doesn't fit the game's theme, it doesn't make sense to immortalize its removal as part of the setting's history. We didn't need a magickal calamity to explain why sandwiches were removed and can no longer be made. We didn't need a momentous natural disaster to explain why spikey wristwraps that slash your opponent automatically vanished into thin air. We didn't need an HRPT to mark the removal of sunslits with glass lenses. We didn't need a mysterious, global epidemic disease to explain why people can no longer create explosive traps or search for hidden doors. If it's decided that something shouldn't exist and should never have existed within the game, you retcon. You don't immortalize.
I'm not sure where you are going with this?
A magick class =/= Sandwich.
Are you saying we don't need an ic reason because it was retconn'd? Because it wasn't retconned and from what I read they don't intend on retconning.
"Mages now have less diverse spell sets but are also now able to gain skill in mundane areas" is not something that will ever make IC sense for an IC event to be the IC cause of. Guilds are OOC constructs, and altering the guild/subguild schema is an OOC event. Of course it's a retcon. Trying to hang a lantern on such a change would be a mistake.
Some of the changes going in might be OK to explain with IC events. But if I ever hear "you know, magickers used to be more powerful. But then X happened and now they can learn to fight good or hide real good instead" I would immediately quit OOC and never return. If staff have to create some bizarre IC justification that never actually reaches the players so they can avoid calling it a retcon, fine. But I hope I never encounter it, because it would damage my suspension of disbelief far more than accepting a retcon.
Quote from: Jingo on March 22, 2016, 09:07:58 PM
Question: Would staff consider letting a player pick two aspects and a mundane subguild? If it's a special application?
Edit: For clarity.
You can't have two subguilds, nor can a subguild be put in as your main guild. It's a code thing.
Any word on touched subguilds?
I'm not going to read 18 pages on my phone, but I just wanted to add my two cents...
Im shocked, but only at the removal of certain elementalist guilds, not the fact that elementalists were changed to be subguilds. The elementalists lacked many mundane skills, and now they can be more fleshed out and have a lot more versatility and will be very scary. I like that. I just wanted to play the drovian, and someday try a nilazi tho. So I'm more sad than happy cause it seems to be more taken away than gained, for me at least that's how it feels. Fingers crossed some option similar opens up soon.
Quote from: Jingo on March 23, 2016, 02:00:48 AM
Any word on touched subguilds?
I'm not sure what you are asking.
Quote from: seidhr on March 23, 2016, 10:12:20 AM
Quote from: Jingo on March 23, 2016, 02:00:48 AM
Any word on touched subguilds?
I'm not sure what you are asking.
Come on baby, just tell me about the touching. Tell me....
(I really would like more details in regards to what being "Touched" gives you. An example might be nice. As of now, it's very vague, but I'm sure that is intentional.)
Doubly excited after seeing these options on the creation menu. Guys, this is going to be fun. :)
Quote from: Desertman on March 23, 2016, 10:13:02 AM
Quote from: seidhr on March 23, 2016, 10:12:20 AM
Quote from: Jingo on March 23, 2016, 02:00:48 AM
Any word on touched subguilds?
I'm not sure what you are asking.
Come on baby, just tell me about the touching. Tell me....
(I really would like more details in regards to what being "Touched" gives you. An example might be nice. As of now, it's very vague, but I'm sure that is intentional.)
Kind of odd that the (higher-Karma and more powerful) Aspects are more detailed on the website than what it means to be Touched. I'm really curious too.
Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 23, 2016, 02:47:27 PM
Quote from: Desertman on March 23, 2016, 10:13:02 AM
Quote from: seidhr on March 23, 2016, 10:12:20 AM
Quote from: Jingo on March 23, 2016, 02:00:48 AM
Any word on touched subguilds?
I'm not sure what you are asking.
Come on baby, just tell me about the touching. Tell me....
(I really would like more details in regards to what being "Touched" gives you. An example might be nice. As of now, it's very vague, but I'm sure that is intentional.)
Kind of odd that the (higher-Karma and more powerful) Aspects are more detailed on the website than what it means to be Touched. I'm really curious too.
From a quick glance at various posts about it on my phone. This the probably inaccurate summary as to what I think it is.
It's the ability to emote cantrips.
Other than that I can't find anything else.
It seems to give you either a bonus to, or higher skillcaps on, certain related skills that "make sense" for those "touched" by an element.
Perhaps also various coded effects, such as a Krathi not suffering from heat or a vivaduan not getting thirsty as much
I imagine you can also emote mild cantrips and more subtle hints to that effect. Krathi can light their spice tubes without a match, etc.
Pure conjecture here but that seems to be the case.
Has staff discussed a new helpfile or adding in Touched sections to the existing magick help files? I think we have a vague idea of what they entail, but it would be helpful to have them in the help files with all the other aspects.
Drov touched subguild:
That one amazing spell that lets you see in the dark.
Climb at a high cap. (Call it spider climb or something.)
Cantrip spell for flavor?
I would play nothing else.
Quote from: Asmoth on March 23, 2016, 03:01:15 PM
Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 23, 2016, 02:47:27 PM
Quote from: Desertman on March 23, 2016, 10:13:02 AM
Quote from: seidhr on March 23, 2016, 10:12:20 AM
Quote from: Jingo on March 23, 2016, 02:00:48 AM
Any word on touched subguilds?
I'm not sure what you are asking.
Come on baby, just tell me about the touching. Tell me....
(I really would like more details in regards to what being "Touched" gives you. An example might be nice. As of now, it's very vague, but I'm sure that is intentional.)
Kind of odd that the (higher-Karma and more powerful) Aspects are more detailed on the website than what it means to be Touched. I'm really curious too.
From a quick glance at various posts about it on my phone. This the probably inaccurate summary as to what I think it is.
It's the ability to emote cantrips.
Other than that I can't find anything else.
If the ability to use emote cantrips is actually going to be karma I'm going to kms
Elkros touched subguild:
That spell that makes you gotta go fast.
A passive boost to stamina and stamina regen.
High capped direction sense (for storm navigation)
Cantrip spell for flavor?
I would play nothing else.
Nilazi Aspects
Death
Void
Control
8 karma required
Quote from: Jingo on March 23, 2016, 05:07:57 PM
Nilazi Aspects
Death
Void
Control
8 karma required
I'd play it for death big boy plays
Quote from: Jihelu on March 23, 2016, 04:58:47 PM
If the ability to use emote cantrips is actually going to be karma I'm going to kms
Technically this has always been the case.
Quote from: Jingo on March 23, 2016, 05:07:57 PM
Nilazi Aspects
...
8 karma required
One of those is so out of what I would assume Nilazi powers to be that even naming it is kind of spilling some serious IC sekretz, imo.
Quote from: Jihelu on March 23, 2016, 04:58:47 PM
Quote from: Asmoth on March 23, 2016, 03:01:15 PM
Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 23, 2016, 02:47:27 PM
Quote from: Desertman on March 23, 2016, 10:13:02 AM
Quote from: seidhr on March 23, 2016, 10:12:20 AM
Quote from: Jingo on March 23, 2016, 02:00:48 AM
Any word on touched subguilds?
I'm not sure what you are asking.
Come on baby, just tell me about the touching. Tell me....
(I really would like more details in regards to what being "Touched" gives you. An example might be nice. As of now, it's very vague, but I'm sure that is intentional.)
Kind of odd that the (higher-Karma and more powerful) Aspects are more detailed on the website than what it means to be Touched. I'm really curious too.
From a quick glance at various posts about it on my phone. This the probably inaccurate summary as to what I think it is.
It's the ability to emote cantrips.
Other than that I can't find anything else.
If the ability to use emote cantrips is actually going to be karma I'm going to kms
Given that magick guilds have always been karma-gated - the ability to use emote cantrips has always been karma. Sorry to hear you died!
Quote from: Rathustra on March 23, 2016, 05:17:07 PM
Quote from: Jihelu on March 23, 2016, 04:58:47 PM
Quote from: Asmoth on March 23, 2016, 03:01:15 PM
Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 23, 2016, 02:47:27 PM
Quote from: Desertman on March 23, 2016, 10:13:02 AM
Quote from: seidhr on March 23, 2016, 10:12:20 AM
Quote from: Jingo on March 23, 2016, 02:00:48 AM
Any word on touched subguilds?
I'm not sure what you are asking.
Come on baby, just tell me about the touching. Tell me....
(I really would like more details in regards to what being "Touched" gives you. An example might be nice. As of now, it's very vague, but I'm sure that is intentional.)
Kind of odd that the (higher-Karma and more powerful) Aspects are more detailed on the website than what it means to be Touched. I'm really curious too.
From a quick glance at various posts about it on my phone. This the probably inaccurate summary as to what I think it is.
It's the ability to emote cantrips.
Other than that I can't find anything else.
If the ability to use emote cantrips is actually going to be karma I'm going to kms
Given that magick guilds have always been karma-gated - the ability to use emote cantrips has always been karma. Sorry to hear you died!
I'm a spooky skeleton...
Let me rephrase this.
If the ability to do, AND ONLY DO, magick cantrips is karma blocked...I'm going to kms.
IE:
I spent five karma on whiran touch (Too lazy to luck up actual karma)
I have the sole ability to make wind emotes.
Thats it.
I wasted five karma then.
Now if you give them a few passive buffs. Sure. It might be worth it.
Re: Touched Subguilds.
One motivation behind making these subguilds were to offer a 'third road' between playing a magicker and playing a mundane. Another was to offer a route into our magick theme for players.
They offer a selection of spells and a selection of mundane abilities that the touched's more subtle elemental connection lets them utilize through cantrips - perceived or otherwise. So a stone touched PC might find that they have an uncanny ability to know what stones are in a given rock pile or a wind touched PC tends to find the wind is more forgiving to them.
Thinking of ways to emote 'cantrips' without being magicker... only thing that comes to mind is..
say (as he thrusts his mug of ale out to a buddy) Hold my ale.. I go' this'gicker shi'.. watch this..
emote stands up, swaying a bit drunkenly before throwing his hands out in front of him dramatically, letting a raunchy one rip. (Pant fluttering in the rear region optional)
say (smugly) See? I can blow hot air too, like them whirly feckers. Pah!
And then people stare in horror for one reason or another. Maybe someone passes out.
But am very curious about what being 'touched' by an element truly means code wise... the suspense is killing me.
This might not be the place, but is it staff's expectation that characters discovered to be "touched" would have to take the gem? If they have full blown spells, I would assume yes.
If not, though, that could be very interesting. They would still get pariah status, and people might look at them as being cursed, but still effectively human (elven, etc). Could maybe still join lower class clans that are not open to gemmed as long as they keep their disgusting little secret hidden like a leprous patch of skin...
Quote from: Rathustra on March 23, 2016, 05:29:49 PM
They offer a selection of spells and a selection of mundane abilities that the touched's more subtle elemental connection lets them utilize through cantrips - perceived or otherwise. So a stone touched PC might find that they have an uncanny ability to know what stones are in a given rock pile or a wind touched PC tends to find the wind is more forgiving to them.
Cool.
Quote from: James de Monet on March 23, 2016, 05:43:38 PM
This might not be the place, but is it staff's expectation that characters discovered to be "touched" would have to take the gem? If they have full blown spells, I would assume yes.
If not, though, that could be very interesting. They would still get pariah status, and people might look at them as being cursed, but still effectively human (elven, etc). Could maybe still join lower class clans that are not open to gemmed as long as they keep their disgusting little secret hidden like a leprous patch of skin...
Magickers are magickers. I would be very against touched not having to get a Gem.
Quote from: Rathustra on March 23, 2016, 05:29:49 PM
Re: Touched Subguilds.
One motivation behind making these subguilds were to offer a 'third road' between playing a magicker and playing a mundane. Another was to offer a route into our magick theme for players.
They offer a selection of spells and a selection of mundane abilities that the touched's more subtle elemental connection lets them utilize through cantrips - perceived or otherwise. So a stone touched PC might find that they have an uncanny ability to know what stones are in a given rock pile or a wind touched PC tends to find the wind is more forgiving to them.
Are touched characters going to be socially or culturally regarded differently than full mages by the VNPC populace?
I wonder if people are going to flip the fuck out when you say a disconnected/idle PC is krath-touched now.
Quote from: RogueGunslinger on March 23, 2016, 05:46:58 PM
Magickers are magickers. I would be very against touched not having to get a Gem.
If they get actual spells, I wholeheartedly agree. But if they don't...suddenly there's a question. A bastard is not a noble by virtue of bearing some noble blood. Is a touched a gicker by virtue of knowing when a storm is coming? Could open up some very interesting RP, and more playable options for people who like the flavor of magick RP, but not the isolation (could also smash down the barriers that make it easy to remember that magick is gross and scary, but we couldn't really know until we tried it...)
Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 23, 2016, 05:53:48 PM
I wonder if people are going to flip the fuck out when you say a disconnected/idle PC is krath-touched now.
Oh, snap.
The virtual world will react to the unknown and unnatural in the same way across the spectrum of elemental affinities. If you make fire run across your fingertips or the torches flare whenever you shout then people will notice and people will treat you as makes sense.
Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 23, 2016, 05:53:48 PM
I wonder if people are going to flip the fuck out when you say a disconnected/idle PC is krath-touched now.
Given that these changes and this class of magicker is entering the game naturally - as in, they are emerging after existing for a period of time, or are being born now. The names that are ascribed to them are up to players. 'Touched' is just how we've named them from an OOC perspective.
Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 23, 2016, 05:53:48 PM
I wonder if people are going to flip the fuck out when you say a disconnected/idle PC is krath-touched now.
I only ever heard it as krath-struck. Slight change in wording, but the same meaning. Hopefully it wouldn't be an issue.
Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 23, 2016, 05:53:48 PM
I wonder if people are going to flip the fuck out when you say a disconnected/idle PC is krath-touched now.
I'm thinking cursed is cursed is cursed.
Quote from: Maylin on March 23, 2016, 05:35:21 PM
Thinking of ways to emote 'cantrips' without being magicker... only thing that comes to mind is..
say (as he thrusts his mug of ale out to a buddy) Hold my ale.. I go' this'gicker shi'.. watch this..
emote stands up, swaying a bit drunkenly before throwing his hands out in front of him dramatically, letting a raunchy one rip. (Pant fluttering in the rear region optional)
say (smugly) See? I can blow hot air too, like them whirly feckers. Pah!
And then people stare in horror for one reason or another. Maybe someone passes out.
But am very curious about what being 'touched' by an element truly means code wise... the suspense is killing me.
It's a sorcerer! Kill it!
Touched get spells.
Quote from: little chicken woman on March 23, 2016, 09:11:55 PM
Touched get spells.
It isn't a major complaint but I wish staff would straight forward post stuff sometimes.
Instead of "Heres some complicated explanation that uses the word cantrip four times" they could go "They get a few spells and shit"
Quote from: Rathustra on March 23, 2016, 05:29:49 PM
Re: Touched Subguilds.
One motivation behind making these subguilds were to offer a 'third road' between playing a magicker and playing a mundane. Another was to offer a route into our magick theme for players.
They offer a selection of spells and a selection of mundane abilities that the touched's more subtle elemental connection lets them utilize through cantrips - perceived or otherwise. So a stone touched PC might find that they have an uncanny ability to know what stones are in a given rock pile or a wind touched PC tends to find the wind is more forgiving to them.
I think I'll give one a go on my next PC just to see.
Name: Dayman
Race Human
Guild: Warrior
Subguild: Krathi-touched
Objective: Fight the Nightman, master karate, friendship
With regard to this update, not because I really care or are in a position to care about who is what.
I find myself oocly wondering everytime I see a krath, fiery, flame, red haired person if they are a secret Krathi...
I am guessing this will pass, but my curiosity is driving me insane heh.
Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 23, 2016, 09:25:41 PM
I think I'll give one a go on my next PC just to see.
Name: Dayman
Race Human
Guild: Warrior
Subguild: Krathi-touched
Objective: Fight the Nightman, master karate, friendship
I laughed
So I've had some time to think about the changes. I'll touch on my thoughts only briefly, since we already have 20 pages on the issue already.
I miss the idea of full elemental guilds. I am also pretty disappointed that Elkros, Drov, and most especially Nilaz are going away from the realm of PCs. I'm looking at it from a flavor and setting perspective, how it added to the overall understanding and exploration of magick, the RP it enabled and enhanced, first and foremost.
That said, I also think that this could be an interesting change.
Firstly, that it does give a character more of a basis in the mundane. They have a lot longer to develop as a character without magick, they can actually get to be really good at their mundane selves... That gives a more solid IC basis to RP out the change when they discover what they are. I like that.
Secondly, I think it could lead to interesting interactions and possibilities. If you want X, Y, and Z, you now have to find three different people. Utilizing magicks became more difficult. I also think there's some potential conflict RP for elements of the same type, but different aspects. It also gives PCs other things to think and reflect on, as to different aspects of the same element. So there's some potential there as well.
Ultimately, I think I'm just going to have to wait and see how these changes play out. I think that if they impact the game negatively, staff will make adjustments as needed. I'm also hoping that perhaps someday we could see the inclusion of the removed elementalists in some way again.
Time will tell.
krath's touch is an actual affliction you get in game comparable to heat sickness in real life.
http://www.armageddon.org/help/view/Krath%27s%20Touch
If you tell someone a link dead person is "Krath touched" Or "out of it" and they start pulling up a pitchfork (Trident) and murdering them in the streets, the problem isn't what you said it's that the player is retarded.
Though it did make me chuckle.
I don't know if the following was answered already, so if it was would someone in the know catch me up? (5 pages was enough for me...)
OOC, why did Elkrans, Drovians, and Nilazis get axed? Are they going to get the same subguild treatment eventually?
IC, do they still exist as VNPCs? Or are we supposed to draw our own conclusions about why the "tea cup is orbiting pluto" on whether or not they exist, or why they're never around anymore?
Quote from: IAmJacksOpinion on March 24, 2016, 08:46:04 AM
I don't know if the following was answered already, so if it was would someone in the know catch me up? (5 pages was enough for me...)
OOC, why did Elkrans, Drovians, and Nilazis get axed? Are they going to get the same subguild treatment eventually?
IC, do they still exist as VNPCs? Or are we supposed to draw our own conclusions about why the "tea cup is orbiting pluto" on whether or not they exist, or why they're never around anymore?
Quote from: http://gdb.armageddon.org/index.php/topic,50864.0.html
Removal of shadow/lightning/void elementalists:
~ Existing drovians, elkrosians and nilazi will continue to play as normal until they retire or die.
~ New PCs of these elements can no longer be created.
Elementalists touched by the demi-elements of shadow and energy or the pseudo-element of void are no longer open for play. Being the products of previous staff, their place in the game world and spell repertoire was developed piecemeal and usually without oversight, creating guilds with a mishmash of spells.
The efforts of staff and players have hammered these elements into staples of the game world and, with some code adjustments, the spells associated with them will find their way back into play. The elements themselves are not ceasing to exist and nothing about this change involves 'retconning' or destroying the player/staff developed lore surrounding these game aspects.
And:
Nothing has changed IC apart from what your PCs might observe. The temple of drov and elkros still possesses NPCs and VNPCs observable via echoes. PC elkrosians, drovians and nilazi still exist until the last one stores or dies.
Quote from: LauraMars on March 23, 2016, 09:31:59 PM
Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 23, 2016, 09:25:41 PM
I think I'll give one a go on my next PC just to see.
Name: Dayman
Race Human
Guild: Warrior
Subguild: Krathi-touched
Objective: Fight the Nightman, master karate, friendship
I laughed
I would sign up to play Nightman but DROV IS GOOONE! WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!
I guess I will just play Crickett.
Thanks Rath. Guess I missed that in my initial shock and awe reading of the release. So when it says "with some adjustment the spells will find their way back in to play", does that mean they'll eventually become playable subs, or that their spells will be added to the new subs. Eg, tempest whiran gets lightning bolt, corruption vivaduan gets some nilaz, etc? (And no one gets some drove because f those plot killing fers, fingers crossed.)
I've had a few nights to sleep on it now, and guess what? I still wish the mainguilds weren't removed. I just don't see the reason for it.. if the goal is to make the game less magick-filled.. or more so.. who's to say it'll work for that? If the goal is to focus on magickers as "people.." Then let me reply with this:
I played a rukkian with a subguild that offered every mundane skill I needed. She was called a "mage" by one templar, sure, but to her circle of friends and allies, she was a person. She lived a normal life, which was rather mundane. Most of playing her involved socializing, really, not unlike most of my merchantish roles. It was handy to have a subguild to enhance her abilities enough to get out and about and also interact in more ways within the city. (she had a mundane subguild btw).
So to read this:
Quote from: Rathustra
This decision was made to move away from magickers as 'elementalists', 'mages' or 'wizards' - characters defined by their magick, who are entirely about their magick. Magickers in Armageddon are people first and this is now properly reflected by their main guild selection.
..It just doesn't fit with my experience. If anything my rukkian was more of a person than all my other characters so far.
That's why I just have to realize that this change is just a nerf that has essentially just disabled magickers greatly. I wouldn't roleplay a magicker any differently as a main-guilded one or a sub-guilded one. They were always "people first" to begin with.
I'll still roll up a sub-guilded mage, and the skillset will be different. I don't think it'll change how my roleplay works, at all. I was never into overly RPing the magickal nature of my PC. Bleh. I knew some who did, and I won't name names, but I thought that RP was pretty boring.
As for how I RPed magick:
If I did RP her magick, I'd just keep it short and sweet. I tried to add a little mystery to it. I mostly roleplayed it as a connection, an emotional one also. I liked to think of Ruk as a presence that constantly affected her. It may have changed her personality, perhaps, but "chicken or egg?" She also saw it as a tool. She'd occasionally want to use her magick to get revenge on someone who had wronged her. In those moments, she boiled with rage. Was this her, or did her mood shake like the ground beneath her?
In a very emotional state, she would throw a cantrip. I have seen this tactic used by.. at least four other magickers. It's a common thing, and it now finally described in the helpfiles.
All of this being said, I have to say I really look forward to making a "touched" subguild. That'd be something I would like to RP. For the sake of survival, though, it would have to be far less frequent. Either that or there's a gem headed my way, with all the social disadvantage that comes with it, but without any real magickal power, at least it seems that way.
So no more fearlessly braving threats that I know my magick can control.
I don't know why we had to lose the option of having a full connection to an element. Rathustra's explanations for what this change is supposed to represent for the overall vision of the game do not appeal to me. They don't fit with my personal experience roleplaying a magicker. I was never told by staff not to RP her this or that way. I usually got a thumbs up. In essence, she was already a person, first, as far as I can tell.
This is the most upsetting loss in the game since I've started playing.
I think it's intended to be a general policy explanation, not a criticism toward the roleplaying of people who have historically played magickers. And it's only one of the several explanations that have been offered (making magic more unpredictable and reflective of the game world, so that not every Krathi is exactly the same, is the one that makes the most sense to me). I don't think anyone is actually saying that people have only played magickers as skill sets instead of roles.
Anyway, I'm not targeting you specifically Harmless. It's just a sentiment that keeps coming up that seems to have really struck people one way when, from the context of the statement itself, I don't really think it was meant the way that people are taking it.
Quote from: valeria on March 24, 2016, 01:11:23 PM
making magic more unpredictable and reflective of the game world, so that not every Krathi is exactly the same, is the one that makes the most sense to me
I tried to have her magick be used unpredictably. I tried making her magick subtle. Often she would cast one spell at most in a scene. It might even be the only spellcast for the whole session. On outings, of course, there'd be a few casts, but not many. She'd only use 4-5 spells in her repertoire at a time.
When reading the bolded segment, it implies that the RP of a mainguilded magicker "doesn't reflect the game world." Was that true, given my efforts above? If it is true.. then it is like being told that I failed to roleplay in a way that reflected the gameworld. Not because of my failings as a player but because the guild and spell/skill set didn't allow for it. But I disagree with that also.
The old system already has things to make it a bit unpredictable: branching, spell fails, limited mana pool, difficult crafting system.
So, I just have to disagree with the decision and pretty much all the reasons behind it at this point... don't worry, I'll play, but definitely with a deep sadness that what I used to consider reflective of the game world and realistic has been deemed inappropriate and retconned.
Same sentiments towards entirely removing three elements, even if it's temporary. I just don't see why the reduction here helps.. anything.
Other staff have already stated this, but I'm going to say it again: The change was in no way at all reflective of how anyone has played an elementalist in the past. The comments regarding the role of the elementalist and the focus on magick as 'people' first is reflective of how we see the entire guild system. It is nothing to do with any individual or their play.
Quote from: Harmless on March 24, 2016, 01:33:08 PM
When reading the bolded segment, it implies that the RP of a mainguilded magicker "doesn't reflect the game world." Was that true, given my efforts above? If it is true.. then it is like being told that I failed to roleplay in a way that reflected the gameworld. Not because of my failings as a player but because the guild and spell/skill set didn't allow for it. But I disagree with that also.
I don't think it was meant to be a reflection on the RP of a mainguilded magicker.
I think it was meant as an indictment of the coded limits that were placed on the characters, not by the players, but by the way the code hard-stops at "barely competent" for any skill that a mainguilded magicker had because it was, by definition, only available at sub-guild levels. This is where "not reflective of the game world" comes in. Suppose the player chose to play as an unmanifested magicker. Why couldn't they progress as a warrior? Because their guild choice unrealistically limited that.
I'm not sure I love the solution that came out. My personal preference would be anyone who chooses a magicker subguild should get totally randomized access to some sub-set of that elements spells to a) make magickers more random, b) eliminate attempts at every Burglar/Elementalist just having the perfect combination of spells to supplement their intended activities, and c) put some of the feeling that magicks is inflicted on the character, not some choice they necessarily control.
That aside, I think the key takeaway is that this change was not an indictment of the play of Mainguilded Magickers or a slight at those players. It was instead a realization that the handcuffs the code put on those players and characters were not as intended.
ETA: As the Ninja-Adhira put it...
Quote from: Adhira on March 24, 2016, 01:39:47 PM
Other staff have already stated this, but I'm going to say it again: The change was in no way at all reflective of how anyone has played an elementalist in the past.
I never had handcuffs on my roleplay, or my coded abilities with my mages.
I'll never see any hint of truth at that argument and I'm just going to have to leave it at that. Thanks to staff for making new subguilds for us, truly. But after hearing and reading these posts (and thanks for restating things I missed staff say in this massive thread), we'll just have to agree to disagree.
I love these subguilds and they really inspire me--I've already come up with some character ideas that I'm really excited about--but it's hard not to feel like something really important and fundamental was lost. However, from what staff have been saying, they don't seem intent on burning any bridges. I'm confident that they are listening to our concerns and taking them into account as they go forward.
Quote from: Harmless on March 24, 2016, 01:58:44 PM
I never had handcuffs on my roleplay, or my coded abilities with my mages.
I'll never see any hint of truth at that argument and I'm just going to have to leave it at that.
The handcuffs he's talking about is every rogue mage being super easy to spot on an OOC level. Forcing them to roleplay certain ways and not allowing them the ability to be seen as normal people with normal lives. Just because you have an example of your character not having to play like that doesn't mean it's the norm.
I like the increased ability for mages to be relevant in everyday situations, so they don't have to automatically become a cave-dwelling refugee.
Still disappointed in the loss of nilazi and main guild mages (just let them use mage-specific expanded subguilds w/ mundane abilities).
Not disappointed in the increased rarity of That One Drovian Spell.
I want to see more CODED mundane abilities that echo or accomplish several things that magick can - and mundanes should be able to - do.
Blindfolds. Restraints. The ability to break free of restraints. Temporary barriers. Etc.
Considering how these changes have been implemented...I'm very curious to see what's going to happen to the changes made to the mundane guilds.
I'm getting a "shades of Arm 2.0" in this. Prepare for the break-down/apart of mundane guilds.
I hope not. Mundane guilds need to be able to do more things, not less.
Quote from: Harmless on March 24, 2016, 01:33:08 PM
Quote from: valeria on March 24, 2016, 01:11:23 PM
making magic more unpredictable and reflective of the game world, so that not every Krathi is exactly the same, is the one that makes the most sense to me
When reading the bolded segment, it implies that the RP of a mainguilded magicker "doesn't reflect the game world."
I can say pretty confidently that you're reading me wrong. When I say more reflective of the game world, what I first mean is not having every whiran have exactly the same connection to whiran as every other whiran. The party line has always been that magick is unpredictable. Except when each whiran was codedly the same, it wasn't unpredictable at all.
So no, I didn't feel that mages as coded didn't reflect the documentation, and that had nothing to do with how people play/ed them. Especially not you, since it sounds like you're a good rper.
Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 24, 2016, 02:25:35 PM
I hope not. Mundane guilds need to be able to do more things, not less.
(https://i.imgflip.com/11dj5f.jpg)
Quote from: Pale Horse on March 24, 2016, 02:23:15 PM
Considering how these changes have been implemented...I'm very curious to see what's going to happen to the changes made to the mundane guilds.
I'm getting a "shades of Arm 2.0" in this. Prepare for the break-down/apart of mundane guilds.
I should point out that by "break-down/apart," I mean that the skill trees will be broken down into new guilds, such as: Merchant = Crafter and Trader.
Quote from: Pale Horse on March 24, 2016, 02:29:14 PM
Quote from: Pale Horse on March 24, 2016, 02:23:15 PM
Considering how these changes have been implemented...I'm very curious to see what's going to happen to the changes made to the mundane guilds.
I'm getting a "shades of Arm 2.0" in this. Prepare for the break-down/apart of mundane guilds.
I should point out that by "break-down/apart," I mean that the skill trees will be broken down into new guilds, such as: Merchant = Crafter and Trader.
Quote from: Delirium on March 24, 2016, 02:29:06 PM
Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 24, 2016, 02:25:35 PM
I hope not. Mundane guilds need to be able to do more things, not less.
Quote from: seidhr on March 22, 2016, 02:45:45 AM
In fact, they'll have to earn some of their prowess the hard way now.
What does this mean?
I'm all but certain it won't happen, but I'm amused by the idea of pickpocket and burglar being split into four separate guilds rather than merged as was the common suggestion.
I'm not sure if it has been suggested, but I hope to see quasi-elemental return in the form of their own subguild, with each quasi-element as an aspect. Though, I suppose some of their spells are going to be disseminated amongst the spell trees.
Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 24, 2016, 02:29:47 PM
Quote from: Pale Horse on March 24, 2016, 02:29:14 PM
Quote from: Pale Horse on March 24, 2016, 02:23:15 PM
Considering how these changes have been implemented...I'm very curious to see what's going to happen to the changes made to the mundane guilds.
I'm getting a "shades of Arm 2.0" in this. Prepare for the break-down/apart of mundane guilds.
I should point out that by "break-down/apart," I mean that the skill trees will be broken down into new guilds, such as: Merchant = Crafter and Trader.
Quote from: Delirium on March 24, 2016, 02:29:06 PM
Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 24, 2016, 02:25:35 PM
I hope not. Mundane guilds need to be able to do more things, not less.
Maybe we're seeing a change in how guilds will work, now.
You get a Main guild, a Second guild and a Sub-guild.
Or you pick your Main guild and an aspect of it that determines your starting skills. You'll still get all the skills that the main guild would have gained, anyway, you just come to them in a different way from before.
Quote from: Beethoven on March 24, 2016, 02:31:11 PM
I'm all but certain it won't happen, but I'm amused by the idea of pickpocket and burglar being split into four separate guilds rather than merged as was the common suggestion.
Well I mean, I would assume those two would be left alone and Assassins, Rangers, Warriors, and Merchants would be split up. I really don't have a problem with this, as it just happened to all those other guilds, why not these?
Oh, I wouldn't necessarily have a problem with it either, depending on how it was handled. I'm just amused at the prospect of splitting up those two.
Quote from: Pale Horse on March 24, 2016, 02:32:42 PM
Maybe we're seeing a change in how guilds will work, now.
You get a Main guild, a Second guild and a Sub-guild.
Or you pick your Main guild and an aspect of it that determines your starting skills. You'll still get all the skills that the main guild would have gained, anyway, you just come to them in a different way from before.
I don't see any sign of that. Nor would I particularly like it if it was a thing.
If they split warriors in to something like Attack Warriors and Defense Warriors (which Jingo thinks is the most "logical" split), or Merchants into Crafters and Traders, that'll probably be it for me for a while.
So, it's day 3 for me, and these changes are sinking in some more....
I'll miss elementalist main guilds, but the trade off of the expanded subguilds at least leaves something cool to replace their loss
I really wish Nilaz, Drov and Elkros remained as subguilds too though. The idea of a mundane with a few Drovian, Elkrosian, or Nilazi spells in their back pocket would be just as cool, if not cooler, than the other four elements. I think it's a big mistake leaving them out and I hope staff reconsider on the front.
I'm standing down to Defcon 3. Nuclear launch aborted.
My HOPE is that they are looking to beef up mundanes and slightly depower mages -though mages will still be very scary in their own right due to having mundane guilds.
If that is the case, well by gosh, that would be AMAZING.
Quote from: Delirium on March 24, 2016, 02:38:12 PM
My HOPE is that they are looking to beef up mundanes and slightly depower mages -though mages will still be very scary in their own right due to having mundane guilds.
If that is the case, well by gosh, that would be AMAZING.
I'm feeling the opposite, in a way. I liked magick being mighty just because it's magick and magickers being scary because of the magick and not because they're now a "Blade-dancer" from D&D.
That isn't to say that I'm opposed to these changes, now that my initial shock is fading. I'm still very intrigued about how this will all pan out in time.
I think depowering mages has the exact opposite intended effect of magick being some cosmic unstoppable force that you're at the mercy of. Though I guess if the intention was to make magick less, uh, cosmic unstoppable force that you're at the mercy of and more "buffs plz", mission accomplished.
Quote from: Pale Horse on March 24, 2016, 02:45:59 PM
Quote from: Delirium on March 24, 2016, 02:38:12 PM
My HOPE is that they are looking to beef up mundanes and slightly depower mages -though mages will still be very scary in their own right due to having mundane guilds.
If that is the case, well by gosh, that would be AMAZING.
I'm feeling the opposite, in a way. I liked magick being mighty just because it's magick and magickers being scary because of the magick and not because they're now a "Blade-dancer" from D&D.
That isn't to say that I'm opposed to these changes, now that my initial shock is fading. I'm still very intrigued about how this will all pan out in time.
In theory, I totally agree with you. In practice, in game playability, it just didn't really work well. Mainly due to the constraints of the game documentation.
I'm interested to see if the subguild-style mages work better.
For about a year now I've been thinking my next PC would be an elementalist. I had pondered over the different sorts and worried over the GDB posts about isolation and other things. I really put a lot of thought into it and I had worked up a good idea for my first venture into magic that I've become fond of. I'm sad that I won't ever get to bring him to life after so much thought energy went into him.
However!
The main part of the problem with me personally playing an elementalist was finding a way to put how I like to play into how the game works with elementalists. And now it works differently! The way it works now fits better into the premise of the world, I think, and that makes it easier for me to work with the idea. I'm curious if how magic is treated by the masses will change, and if gemming will change.
(And maybe the guy I had dreamed up will show up after all, with a bit more consideration.)
Quote from: MeTekillot on March 24, 2016, 02:30:21 PM
Quote from: seidhr on March 22, 2016, 02:45:45 AM
In fact, they'll have to earn some of their prowess the hard way now.
What does this mean?
I believe it means you can't use Nil reach for backstab.
Quote from: Refugee on March 24, 2016, 02:53:20 PM
For about a year now I've been thinking my next PC would be an elementalist. I had pondered over the different sorts and worried over the GDB posts about isolation and other things. I really put a lot of thought into it and I had worked up a good idea for my first venture into magic that I've become fond of. I'm sad that I won't ever get to bring him to life after so much thought energy went into him.
That's a big point of the changes I think is lacking. There is currently no option to play a 'magick wielder' first and foremost. All of the mages changed from 'near-complete mage' to 'regular Joe with some additional powers'. But the focus of it is changed. Personally, I think it turns a little bit stale to only have a few spells in your repertoire if you are trying to imagine your char as a magick user. So that's why I'm sort of hoping main-guild mages are still a thing, to represent those people who -are- devoted to magick, rather than other things.
Although I think one thing that really always lacked in mage classes were 'filler' spells - useful and utility things, that ended up leaving most mage guilds relying on some defining end-tree specialist things.
No matter how much I think about it and read counterpoints to my beef with the lack of mainguilds, I don't change my mind.
It only makes sense that some magick users would explore and expand their connection over time. After all, they are forced into a stigmatized sect of the world no matter what, why not figure out how to use it to your advantage? To maybe help those who normally would despise you, so that they tolerate you and let you live?
Honing your ability to use your supernatural connection is how you survive. When you see it that way, mainly magick-using people not only should exist, they naturally always will out of perceived necessity, were this to be realistic.
My two sids. I guess the bottom line is that we're doing this, "currently." I think I've said all my points by now..
I suppose a case could be made for Gemmed being more likely to go Full Magus and be encouraged to become closer to their element, since they don't really have a functional purpose to be anything else in society. Making Magick subguild based brings magick more in line with the tribal approach, where Magickers are integrated in to the tribe as hunters, shamans, and people first, spell-users last. It also helps Rogues, as others have said.
Personally I found the Gemmed/Full Magus approach to magick to be the least fitting with the Armageddon theme, but that's just me. Certainly they could use some more documentation on just what a Gemmed is, what they do, and how they're perceived.
Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 24, 2016, 03:57:08 PM
I suppose a case could be made for Gemmed being more likely to go Full Magus and be encouraged to become closer to their element, since they don't really have a functional purpose to be anything else in society. Making Magick subguild based brings magick more in line with the tribal approach, where Magickers are integrated in to the tribe as hunters, shamans, and people first, spell-users last. It also helps Rogues, as others have said.
Personally I found the Gemmed/Full Magus approach to magick to be the least fitting with the Armageddon theme, but that's just me.
A bit off topic: but I think gemmed could be better served as role-called roles. Make them rarer than the fluffy x-men squads you can get sometimes, and maybe expand some of their powers.
Make sure they're actually scary.
Actually scary? I see this and am baffled. As a full guild, they were incredibly scary. Possibly more so now depending on what spells you get.
Quote from: Dan on March 24, 2016, 04:48:42 PM
Actually scary? I see this and am baffled. As a full guild, they were incredibly scary. Possibly more so now depending on what spells you get.
I forget who first said this, but it was very true.
There is a progression of fear of mages.
doesn't know anything about magick - scared
knows some stuff about magick - not scared
knows a lot about magick - terrified
Quote from: Delirium on March 24, 2016, 02:38:12 PM
My HOPE is that they are looking to beef up mundanes and slightly depower mages -though mages will still be very scary in their own right due to having mundane guilds.
If that is the case, well by gosh, that would be AMAZING.
This is what im hoping for too.
I'm super excited.
Quote from: Adhira on March 24, 2016, 01:39:47 PM
Other staff have already stated this, but I'm going to say it again: The change was in no way at all reflective of how anyone has played an elementalist in the past. The comments regarding the role of the elementalist and the focus on magick as 'people' first is reflective of how we see the entire guild system. It is nothing to do with any individual or their play.
Does staff have the same opinion of warriors? I mean - warriors are combat-machines first - people second, afterall. Rangers are outdoor-hunting-monsters first, people second. Burglers are *defined* by the fact that they can/do break into apartments and spend a lot of time being sneaky. This is the focus -before- they are defined as people. Their personhood is secondary to their main guild.
Except when the player chooses to roleplay their characters as people first. So it IS about to do with our roleplay and really nothing at all to do with the guild system. Because the only time characters are NOT portrayed as their main guild first, and people second, is if they choose to roleplay that way.
They're repeating it because that's the statement that sold them on the change, Lizzie.
It doesn't have to make sense to us.
Staff won't say it, but I will: most magick PCs were just skills sets and not characters.
I'm happy for those who played the exceptions, but they just proved the rule.
I am with any change to any guild, except rangers, unless it's to add MORE shit to them.
Rangers are the perfect guild in my book.
There were plenty of tweaks to be made and things to be explored...
Drastic changes like this one would have been better off set aside and put into a massive rollout of a classless system, I think...instead of just cheapening, broadening, and (what I think will be) commonizing magick.
Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 24, 2016, 06:28:08 PM
Staff won't say it, but I will: most magick PCs were just skills sets and not characters.
I'm happy for those who played the exceptions, but they just proved the rule.
ALL skill sets are just skill sets and not characters. That's what skill sets are: skill sets. Characters are people - whose players have assigned skill sets to them, so that they can flesh out their characters' character - imagine that!
Staff, I dunno if y'all have thought about nesting the subguild selection for wigglers, but that subguild menu is getting out of control.
Quote from: Lizzie on March 24, 2016, 06:39:46 PM
Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 24, 2016, 06:28:08 PM
Staff won't say it, but I will: most magick PCs were just skills sets and not characters.
I'm happy for those who played the exceptions, but they just proved the rule.
ALL skill sets are just skill sets and not characters. That's what skill sets are: skill sets. Characters are people - whose players have assigned skill sets to them, so that they can flesh out their characters' character - imagine that!
It's problematic when karma-required guilds, which are both codedly powerful and also setting a higher standard of RP, are often boiled down in-game to "So, what have you branched yet?"
Personally I'm willing to give staff the benefit of the doubt and not subscribe to bad magicker roleplay as being the reason behind the change. I've enough good ones (and bad ones) to know as a character archetype they're about on par for the playerbase. I do think there are players who are (perhaps subconsciously) looking to rationalize the loss of the guilds in the terms of it being someone's fault, however.
I think the strongest justification for removing full Mage Guilds is that a character so wholly devoted to magick did not really fit in to the game world alongside other PCs, code-wise or theme-wise. They were too extreme, too outside the otherwise low-magick gritty fantasy.
Can't wait to get guild sniffed as a gemmed elementalist.
Lord Oash asks, in sirihish: "So you're a Vivaduan, do you do anything else?"
I wonder, when the second to last elementalist dies, if the last will experience the Quickening and become the last full sorcerer.... MIND BLOWN.
Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 24, 2016, 06:50:46 PM
Quote from: Lizzie on March 24, 2016, 06:39:46 PM
Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 24, 2016, 06:28:08 PM
Staff won't say it, but I will: most magick PCs were just skills sets and not characters.
I'm happy for those who played the exceptions, but they just proved the rule.
ALL skill sets are just skill sets and not characters. That's what skill sets are: skill sets. Characters are people - whose players have assigned skill sets to them, so that they can flesh out their characters' character - imagine that!
It's problematic when karma-required guilds, which are both codedly powerful and also setting a higher standard of RP, are often boiled down in-game to "So, what have you branched yet?"
Personally I'm willing to give staff the benefit of the doubt and not subscribe to bad magicker roleplay as being the reason behind the change. I've enough good ones (and bad ones) to know as a character archetype they're about on par for the playerbase. I do think there are players who are (perhaps subconsciously) looking to rationalize the loss of the guilds in the terms of it being someone's fault, however.
I think the strongest justification for removing full Mage Guilds is that a character so wholly devoted to magick did not really fit in to the game world alongside other PCs, code-wise or theme-wise. They were too extreme, too outside the otherwise low-magick gritty fantasy.
This is true, the first time I killed a Mekillot, with one spell use... I realized, holy shit, Magick is super powered.
But that also was sorta the cool thing, having that much power, but it was also a challenge because you'd have to think, "Should I really PK him with this... He may have tons of time invested in that character and I'll kill him with one cast..."
I almost wish that death let the dead player observe a few minutes AFTER death, so you could tie up loose ends or watch folks cry over your corpse, or spit on it. But meh.
Quote from: FantasyWriter on March 24, 2016, 06:54:52 PM
I wonder, when the second to last elementalist dies, if the last will experience the Quickening and become the last full sorcerer Nilazi.... MIND BLOWN.
Even better.
I like this change. Before, an elementalist's only real response to most situations that relied on code was to use magick. If they chose to not use their magick for RP purposes, such as denying their affliction as is mentioned in documentation, they were dooming themselves to suck at life and/or rely solely on their subguild. If they wanted to become "viable" and do more than play a flavor role, they'd have to practice - and be accused (sometimes rightly so) of just sitting around in isolation spamcasting away until they could wreck anything.
Now that their magickal abilities have been reduced and they have access to more diverse skillsets, they'll need to get out more in the open and interact with other players or the game world to reach similar levels of ability. That seems like a win to me. As a side note, breaking up the four elements into aspects and the associated write ups for the guild descriptions add some neat lore.
While I am a little sad to see Elkros, Drov, and Nilaz go, it sounds a little like they're only being closed so the spells and guilds can be reworked and released again at a later time? Keeping people from making characters with those skills would make an eventual change less jarring, perhaps.
I guess the only thing I don't like is that it seems like it makes elementalists better than the sorcerers in just about every way imaginable. Before, they had massive power that was balanced by the whole kill-on-sight order they had going. I don't know what their newer iteration is like in practice, but mixing magick with a mundane guild seemed like it still had a lot of potential for power that could still justify the thematic hatred of sorcery. But now (and I'm missing a lot I data so I could be wrong), sorcerers seem like they'd be much weaker than elementalists but still have the same steep social stigma against them.
Quote from: Ziel on March 24, 2016, 07:02:01 PM
I like this change. Before, an elementalist's only real response to most situations that relied on code was to use magick. If they chose to not use their magick for RP purposes, such as denying their affliction as is mentioned in documentation, they were dooming themselves to suck at life and/or rely solely on their subguild. If they wanted to become "viable" and do more than play a flavor role, they'd have to practice - and be accused (sometimes rightly so) of just sitting around in isolation spamcasting away until they could wreck anything.
Now that their magickal abilities have been reduced and they have access to more diverse skillsets, they'll need to get out more in the open and interact with other players or the game world to reach similar levels of ability. That seems like a win to me. As a side note, breaking up the four elements into aspects and the associated write ups for the guild descriptions add some neat lore.
While I am a little sad to see Elkros, Drov, and Nilaz go, it sounds a little like they're only being closed so the spells and guilds can be reworked and released again at a later time? Keeping people from making characters with those skills would make an eventual change less jarring, perhaps.
I guess the only thing I don't like is that it seems like it makes elementalists better than the sorcerers in just about every way imaginable. Before, they had massive power that was balanced by the whole kill-on-sight order they had going. I don't know what their newer iteration is like in practice, but mixing magick with a mundane guild seemed like it still had a lot of potential for power that could still justify the thematic hatred of sorcery. But now (and I'm missing a lot I data so I could be wrong), sorcerers seem like they'd be much weaker than elementalists but still have the same steep social stigma against them.
Sorcerers are sub-guilds, in code, now. Warrior/Sorcerer..Ranger/Sorcerer...I admit to not seeing how they are weaker.
Quote from: Pale Horse on March 24, 2016, 07:05:46 PM
Quote from: Ziel on March 24, 2016, 07:02:01 PM
I like this change. Before, an elementalist's only real response to most situations that relied on code was to use magick. If they chose to not use their magick for RP purposes, such as denying their affliction as is mentioned in documentation, they were dooming themselves to suck at life and/or rely solely on their subguild. If they wanted to become "viable" and do more than play a flavor role, they'd have to practice - and be accused (sometimes rightly so) of just sitting around in isolation spamcasting away until they could wreck anything.
Now that their magickal abilities have been reduced and they have access to more diverse skillsets, they'll need to get out more in the open and interact with other players or the game world to reach similar levels of ability. That seems like a win to me. As a side note, breaking up the four elements into aspects and the associated write ups for the guild descriptions add some neat lore.
While I am a little sad to see Elkros, Drov, and Nilaz go, it sounds a little like they're only being closed so the spells and guilds can be reworked and released again at a later time? Keeping people from making characters with those skills would make an eventual change less jarring, perhaps.
I guess the only thing I don't like is that it seems like it makes elementalists better than the sorcerers in just about every way imaginable. Before, they had massive power that was balanced by the whole kill-on-sight order they had going. I don't know what their newer iteration is like in practice, but mixing magick with a mundane guild seemed like it still had a lot of potential for power that could still justify the thematic hatred of sorcery. But now (and I'm missing a lot I data so I could be wrong), sorcerers seem like they'd be much weaker than elementalists but still have the same steep social stigma against them.
Sorcerers are sub-guilds, in code, now. Warrior/Sorcerer..Ranger/Sorcerer...I admit to not seeing how they are weaker.
Well, when you now compare warrior / whira travel to warrior / sorc movement...the latter is not really outclassing the former by much.
Quote from: Bogre on March 24, 2016, 07:35:56 PM
Quote from: Pale Horse on March 24, 2016, 07:05:46 PM
Quote from: Ziel on March 24, 2016, 07:02:01 PM
I like this change. Before, an elementalist's only real response to most situations that relied on code was to use magick. If they chose to not use their magick for RP purposes, such as denying their affliction as is mentioned in documentation, they were dooming themselves to suck at life and/or rely solely on their subguild. If they wanted to become "viable" and do more than play a flavor role, they'd have to practice - and be accused (sometimes rightly so) of just sitting around in isolation spamcasting away until they could wreck anything.
Now that their magickal abilities have been reduced and they have access to more diverse skillsets, they'll need to get out more in the open and interact with other players or the game world to reach similar levels of ability. That seems like a win to me. As a side note, breaking up the four elements into aspects and the associated write ups for the guild descriptions add some neat lore.
While I am a little sad to see Elkros, Drov, and Nilaz go, it sounds a little like they're only being closed so the spells and guilds can be reworked and released again at a later time? Keeping people from making characters with those skills would make an eventual change less jarring, perhaps.
I guess the only thing I don't like is that it seems like it makes elementalists better than the sorcerers in just about every way imaginable. Before, they had massive power that was balanced by the whole kill-on-sight order they had going. I don't know what their newer iteration is like in practice, but mixing magick with a mundane guild seemed like it still had a lot of potential for power that could still justify the thematic hatred of sorcery. But now (and I'm missing a lot I data so I could be wrong), sorcerers seem like they'd be much weaker than elementalists but still have the same steep social stigma against them.
Sorcerers are sub-guilds, in code, now. Warrior/Sorcerer..Ranger/Sorcerer...I admit to not seeing how they are weaker.
Well, when you now compare warrior / whira travel to warrior / sorc movement...the latter is not really outclassing the former by much.
I can how that can be. As far as "raw ability" I would think that the warrior/whiran traveler is "better" for shades of "better," being linked to natural mana regen and spells which naturally compliment one another within an element.
Then again, a warrior/sorcerer of movement may not have the within-element complimentary spells, they do have the versatility of a "broader" set of spells related to movement.
I would argue that the "stronger" pairing is left up to the wants and opinions of the player of what makes a "stronger" combination.
Quote from: Pale Horse on March 24, 2016, 07:41:07 PM
Quote from: Bogre on March 24, 2016, 07:35:56 PM
Quote from: Pale Horse on March 24, 2016, 07:05:46 PM
Quote from: Ziel on March 24, 2016, 07:02:01 PM
I like this change. Before, an elementalist's only real response to most situations that relied on code was to use magick. If they chose to not use their magick for RP purposes, such as denying their affliction as is mentioned in documentation, they were dooming themselves to suck at life and/or rely solely on their subguild. If they wanted to become "viable" and do more than play a flavor role, they'd have to practice - and be accused (sometimes rightly so) of just sitting around in isolation spamcasting away until they could wreck anything.
Now that their magickal abilities have been reduced and they have access to more diverse skillsets, they'll need to get out more in the open and interact with other players or the game world to reach similar levels of ability. That seems like a win to me. As a side note, breaking up the four elements into aspects and the associated write ups for the guild descriptions add some neat lore.
While I am a little sad to see Elkros, Drov, and Nilaz go, it sounds a little like they're only being closed so the spells and guilds can be reworked and released again at a later time? Keeping people from making characters with those skills would make an eventual change less jarring, perhaps.
I guess the only thing I don't like is that it seems like it makes elementalists better than the sorcerers in just about every way imaginable. Before, they had massive power that was balanced by the whole kill-on-sight order they had going. I don't know what their newer iteration is like in practice, but mixing magick with a mundane guild seemed like it still had a lot of potential for power that could still justify the thematic hatred of sorcery. But now (and I'm missing a lot I data so I could be wrong), sorcerers seem like they'd be much weaker than elementalists but still have the same steep social stigma against them.
Sorcerers are sub-guilds, in code, now. Warrior/Sorcerer..Ranger/Sorcerer...I admit to not seeing how they are weaker.
Well, when you now compare warrior / whira travel to warrior / sorc movement...the latter is not really outclassing the former by much.
I can how that can be. As far as "raw ability" I would think that the warrior/whiran traveler is "better" for shades of "better," being linked to natural mana regen and spells which naturally compliment one another within an element.
Then again, a warrior/sorcerer of movement may not have the within-element complimentary spells, they do have the versatility of a "broader" set of spells related to movement.
I would argue that the "stronger" pairing is left up to the wants and opinions of the player of what makes a "stronger" combination.
Bogre summed it up well. There's still a gap there I'm sure, but it seems like it might be much more narrow now while the social aspects of elementalists and sorcerers have remained the same. It's not a huge deal, I'm just sayin'.
I'm very interested to see how these changes play out, I also love the splitting of elemental abilities up, as adding an "entry level magicker subguild" by way of the touched options allows people and staff the ability to explore elementalism without any game-breaking potential assuming I understand the nature of the "touched" bit, I am also a massive fan of the seemingly now instated ability to have a character that can fully contribute in meaningful ways to clans/plots and not feel inherently gimped, having the emergence of magickal talent as a potential plot twist if/when it makes sense or is desired, this could be the best change I've seen yet
Quote from: Pale Horse on March 24, 2016, 07:41:07 PM
Quote from: Bogre on March 24, 2016, 07:35:56 PM
Quote from: Pale Horse on March 24, 2016, 07:05:46 PM
Quote from: Ziel on March 24, 2016, 07:02:01 PM
I like this change. Before, an elementalist's only real response to most situations that relied on code was to use magick. If they chose to not use their magick for RP purposes, such as denying their affliction as is mentioned in documentation, they were dooming themselves to suck at life and/or rely solely on their subguild. If they wanted to become "viable" and do more than play a flavor role, they'd have to practice - and be accused (sometimes rightly so) of just sitting around in isolation spamcasting away until they could wreck anything.
Now that their magickal abilities have been reduced and they have access to more diverse skillsets, they'll need to get out more in the open and interact with other players or the game world to reach similar levels of ability. That seems like a win to me. As a side note, breaking up the four elements into aspects and the associated write ups for the guild descriptions add some neat lore.
While I am a little sad to see Elkros, Drov, and Nilaz go, it sounds a little like they're only being closed so the spells and guilds can be reworked and released again at a later time? Keeping people from making characters with those skills would make an eventual change less jarring, perhaps.
I guess the only thing I don't like is that it seems like it makes elementalists better than the sorcerers in just about every way imaginable. Before, they had massive power that was balanced by the whole kill-on-sight order they had going. I don't know what their newer iteration is like in practice, but mixing magick with a mundane guild seemed like it still had a lot of potential for power that could still justify the thematic hatred of sorcery. But now (and I'm missing a lot I data so I could be wrong), sorcerers seem like they'd be much weaker than elementalists but still have the same steep social stigma against them.
Sorcerers are sub-guilds, in code, now. Warrior/Sorcerer..Ranger/Sorcerer...I admit to not seeing how they are weaker.
Well, when you now compare warrior / whira travel to warrior / sorc movement...the latter is not really outclassing the former by much.
I can how that can be. As far as "raw ability" I would think that the warrior/whiran traveler is "better" for shades of "better," being linked to natural mana regen and spells which naturally compliment one another within an element.
Then again, a warrior/sorcerer of movement may not have the within-element complimentary spells, they do have the versatility of a "broader" set of spells related to movement.
I would argue that the "stronger" pairing is left up to the wants and opinions of the player of what makes a "stronger" combination.
Type HELP GATHER.
Sorcerers win, unlimited magick to just kill some plants... DIE PLANTS
Quote from: Bogre on March 24, 2016, 07:35:56 PM
Quote from: Pale Horse on March 24, 2016, 07:05:46 PM
Quote from: Ziel on March 24, 2016, 07:02:01 PM
I like this change. Before, an elementalist's only real response to most situations that relied on code was to use magick. If they chose to not use their magick for RP purposes, such as denying their affliction as is mentioned in documentation, they were dooming themselves to suck at life and/or rely solely on their subguild. If they wanted to become "viable" and do more than play a flavor role, they'd have to practice - and be accused (sometimes rightly so) of just sitting around in isolation spamcasting away until they could wreck anything.
Now that their magickal abilities have been reduced and they have access to more diverse skillsets, they'll need to get out more in the open and interact with other players or the game world to reach similar levels of ability. That seems like a win to me. As a side note, breaking up the four elements into aspects and the associated write ups for the guild descriptions add some neat lore.
While I am a little sad to see Elkros, Drov, and Nilaz go, it sounds a little like they're only being closed so the spells and guilds can be reworked and released again at a later time? Keeping people from making characters with those skills would make an eventual change less jarring, perhaps.
I guess the only thing I don't like is that it seems like it makes elementalists better than the sorcerers in just about every way imaginable. Before, they had massive power that was balanced by the whole kill-on-sight order they had going. I don't know what their newer iteration is like in practice, but mixing magick with a mundane guild seemed like it still had a lot of potential for power that could still justify the thematic hatred of sorcery. But now (and I'm missing a lot I data so I could be wrong), sorcerers seem like they'd be much weaker than elementalists but still have the same steep social stigma against them.
Sorcerers are sub-guilds, in code, now. Warrior/Sorcerer..Ranger/Sorcerer...I admit to not seeing how they are weaker.
Well, when you now compare warrior / whira travel to warrior / sorc movement...the latter is not really outclassing the former by much.
I disagree. I believe sorcerers get many more spells, considering there are many more movement spells than just whiran spells.
And then considering this recent update:
Quote from: nessalin on February 15, 2016, 08:14:25 AM
-Sorcerer subguilds have had their number of spells roughly doubled.
It'd seem sorcerers are potentially doing much better in the magick department than any single elementalist.
Ooh, I hadn't noticed that update yet. In light of all that, I get to redact that fourth paragraph and be pretty happy about everything. Thanks!
Do we have to spec-app for the new magickey-stuff (like fire-touched or whatever)? Or are they choices during chargen if you have the karmabucks?
Quote from: Zoan on March 25, 2016, 10:57:02 PM
Do we have to spec-app for the new magickey-stuff (like fire-touched or whatever)? Or are they choices during chargen if you have the karmabucks?
They're choices, if you've got the karma.
great change, drop guild specific skill caps 1 lvl down and you ll have a perfect balance.
ranger: archery, weapon, stealth,etc.
warrior: combat & weapons
losing the master cap is a great trade off
Quote from: Pale Horse on March 25, 2016, 11:26:37 PM
if you've got the karma.
Feels like this should be the subtitle of the game.
Armageddon: If You've Got Karma
And an increasingly souring experience if you don't.
My most powerful character to date is a merchant/armor-maker. He had advanced weapons, half-giant guards, magicks, and a number of other spooky stuff at his disposal at one point. That character proved to me something that Sanvean said a long time ago, 'The only skill you need is sirihish'
The fact that a ranger can only cast a handful of spells doesn't make him an less of a magicker in my eyes. The fact that a warrior only has a few sorcerer spells doesn't make them any less of a defiler. Though the awesome power of RP my merchant could have still killed them both.
I don't have any issues with this change. I do have the feeling that there will be a lot more hidden magickers around for a while at least until people stop experimenting with them. However I feel that this will just basically leads to seeing places outside of allanak becoming more populated and becoming even more dangerous, and I'm okay with that.
Though, I must say with all these changes, I fear for rangers :P
My only concern, and keep in mind this is all guessing as I've never played a Templar or higher than a private in aod... My concern is that because there are going to so many magick enhanced mundanes that maybe staff and/or the Templars are gonna go from punishment to instant murder of infractions in a "thin the herd" type of move.
Now I may be totally wrong, just is my fear that Joe magicker will have some Templar visible shit on him and hey are like KEEL HIM!
Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 24, 2016, 06:50:46 PMThey were too extreme, too outside the otherwise low-magick gritty fantasy.
Nothing about the game is low magick.
No-
thing.I'm not sure how this keeps coming up as some kind of point, but it couldn't ring more false. Every aspect of the game is influenced by magick, every facet of the power structure is protected by magick and every major HRPT and major change to the game world has involved magick. The game world and everything about it is founded, build upon and fueled by magick powers.
You're posts are really getting a real "Marsha, Marsha, Marsha!" vibe.
Quote from: Asmoth on March 26, 2016, 02:10:24 PM
My only concern, and keep in mind this is all guessing as I've never played a Templar or higher than a private in aod... My concern is that because there are going to so many magick enhanced mundanes that maybe staff and/or the Templars are gonna go from punishment to instant murder of infractions in a "thin the herd" type of move.
Now I may be totally wrong, just is my fear that Joe magicker will have some Templar visible shit on him and hey are like KEEL HIM!
That might very well happen. But someone has to catch the hidden magicker in question casting first and then report it to the authorities.
Of course, the 'needing to catching someone casting first' is completely optional and can be skipped for convenience . It just becomes a question of who's been earning the templar's trust more. :)
QuoteI'm not sure how this keeps coming up as some kind of point, but it couldn't ring more false. Every aspect of the game is influenced by magick, every facet of the power structure is protected by magick and every major HRPT and major change to the game world has involved magick. The game world and everything about it is founded, build upon and fueled by magick powers.
You're taking it out of context, the same as someone else. You can call the 'state of magick in the game' high or low fantasy or high or low magick or whatever you want to; The gist of it is, magickal roleplay is not up in the forefront. Magick has it's effect on everything, but the average gameplay does not revolve around magick of any sort, which is what drew a lot of people to the game.
Yup, but there's also a lot of us who are completely the opposite and prefer the magick portions of the game.
Quote from: th3kaiser on March 26, 2016, 02:40:57 PM
Yup, but there's also a lot of us who are completely the opposite and prefer the magick portions of the game.
I basically play nothing BUT magickers.
Quote from: th3kaiser on March 26, 2016, 02:40:57 PM
Yup, but there's also a lot of us who are completely the opposite and prefer the magick portions of the game.
Which is why the segregation and lack of mixing was such an ideal. You could enjoy the magick portion of the game, and not have it constantly surrounding those of us who did not want high-magickal-exposure roleplay.
This is what my burden of change was about. The system in place was ideal for keeping the two -mostly- separated. It brought about frequent discussion on the merits of more mixing, which was wildly opposed from those in my camp. However, the burden of change is on the proof (or sound logical theory) that more magickal exposure in daily routine is good for the game, is on those wanting the change, not on those thriving in the current ideal.
At least...that's how things -generally- go.
Edit to add: Essentially, the demand for integration of magick into the daily roleplay of everyone else was where things got messed up. I never demanded mages be more mundane or do more to help the mundanes or to give me more things to do. However, the other side often got bored with their side of the magickal fence, and wanted to be more involved on the other side as well. This is, I believe, the intent of this subguild change; to make magickal characters less dependent on the mundane for their shit. I think (from what I've been able to gather). However, the concern comes in that it will simply lead to magick being overdone and more present throughout the game, which is not a desirable side effect by most of those in the pro-mundane camp, and this is why there was the earlier statement that it didn't seem well thought out. This is not to bring it back up, this is kind of a synopsis of the entire thing because the 'counter' of 'But some of us just like the magick side' isn't really valid in those contexts, i.e. There was nothing preventing you from playing the magickal setting, but there -may- now be prevention of us playing in the low-magickal setting now. There was a constant call for magick to be more 'important' and 'noted' in the daily life of the mundane, which just wasn't ever a very well received idea (with exceptions on certain littler ideas).
Ah, I see what you're saying now. I only brought up the lots of us like magick thing because your statement made me feel like you were implying most people want it kept to a minimum. Which I'd kind of disagree with. But, either way we are just going to have to see how the new magickers work out.
If I were to guess, the big changes are you're going to see more unmanifested in clans for longer periods of time and slightly less gemmers and more rogues due to being a loner will be a bit easier and more approachable to people who are familiar with mundane skillsets and less with surviving as a magicker outside.
There will always be those who love magick and those hate it.
The problem we run into in the game, at least in my opinion is that the people who hate it, will point at documentation all day long saying that it should be rarer, people should hate every mage they see etc etc.
People who love it will interpret it differently, because they want to play a game where they can interact with people.
So you will get the Armaddicts who are vehemently against magick.
And you will get TheKaisers who don't play anything else but magick.
It's a tough balancing act for staff I'm sure. They want mages, but they don't want ALL mages. They want mundanes, but they don't want all mundanes.
I don't think anyone has the answer.
Quote from: Vwest on March 26, 2016, 02:29:19 PM
Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 24, 2016, 06:50:46 PMThey were too extreme, too outside the otherwise low-magick gritty fantasy.
Nothing about the game is low magick.
No-thing.
I'm not sure how this keeps coming up as some kind of point, but it couldn't ring more false. Every aspect of the game is influenced by magick, every facet of the power structure is protected by magick and every major HRPT and major change to the game world has involved magick. The game world and everything about it is founded, build upon and fueled by magick powers.
You're posts are really getting a real "Marsha, Marsha, Marsha!" vibe.
The game world is built on the bones of magick. You're right that it has influenced everything. But for me, the meat and potatoes of the game are the stories of normal(ish) people trying to eke out a living with just their brains and brawn. I find drama and inspiration of people facing these challenges, which some times include outbursts of magickal powers outside the realm of normal human understanding.
The lonely hunter clinging to life in the wastes is low magick. Soldiers fighting against giant beasts in defense of their homes is low magick. Merchant houses plotting against one another over control of trade is low magick. Rivalries between noble houses and the currying of influence and plotting assassination is low magick.
Until someone with perfectly controlled and immense elemental power is drafted to put swift ends to the problems.
Magicker PCs kill the drama of the game with their ironically mundane utility. They make things too easy. They make that huge laser light show less scary because HEY, it's not all that unusual compared to what Magickal Malik has been doing all week.
It's not really current magicker players' fault. Magick is a twinky storytelling device because the system we have now was developed by a twinky player who's interest was to lord over people. In that respect I think this is a good change, flattening and widening the scope that magick can affect player PCs. The real tyrannical magick is still there, just in the realm of staff where it can be used properly. I'm not terribly excited to see a group of magick subguild rangers ride in and start raising Cain (because I don't find magick particularly interesting), but I'm sure I'll adapt.
I am taking an arm break because of baby...So I haven't tired the change out and I think its interesting idea but core pure elementalist classes should absolutely not have been removed from the game..yes a warrior that can cast a handful of spells is cool..but I play this game for the mages...I typically want to play a mage..not a ranger with some extra mppff..so its unlikely I'll return to arm until mages back in. I've been arm 12 + years..I could care freaking less for the Dark Sun setting. I play for the magic system and the level of RP. Mages deserves their own class..while adding some magick subguilds is neat you should absolutely be able to play a pure caster.
Quote from: Bast on March 28, 2016, 12:18:49 PM
I am taking an arm break because of baby...So I haven't tired the change out and I think its interesting idea but core pure elementalist classes should absolutely not have been removed from the game..yes a warrior that can cast a handful of spells is cool..but I play this game for the mages...I typically want to play a mage..not a ranger with some extra mppff..so its unlikely I'll return to arm until mages back in. I've been arm 12 + years..I could care freaking less for the Dark Sun setting. I play for the magic system and the level of RP. Mages deserves their own class..while adding some magick subguilds is neat you should absolutely be able to play a pure caster.
So you're never coming back? Because full mages are extinct.
Don't worry, Bast. I'm not going to give up on the issue while you're off, and I also intend to keep playing the game in part to see how the loss of mages affects the game and provide meaningful feedback. Enjoy your break :)
No no no Bast. Come back. Your one of my favs :-[
Help files are still wrong.
Karma Options http://www.armageddon.org/help/view/Karma%20Options still shows shadow, lightning, and void elementalists still something you can play with the appropriate karma level.
Drovians http://www.armageddon.org/help/view/Drovians still shows that they can be played, at 4 karma.
Nilazi http://www.armageddon.org/help/view/Nilazi still shows they can be played, at 6 karma.
Elkrosans http://www.armageddon.org/help/view/Elkrosians still shows they can be played, at 5 karma
I'm kind of tickled at the notion that taking the gem is now a career path instead of a wholly self-contained player experience.
Tired of casting out in the wilderness? Take the gem and start hobnobbing with the templars!
That was always the case?
Quote from: Dalmeth on March 29, 2016, 10:04:50 PM
I'm kind of tickled at the notion that taking the gem is now a career path instead of a wholly self-contained player experience.
Tired of casting out in the wilderness? Take the gem and start hobnobbing with the templars!
Gemmed have always worked for the Templars, indirectly or directly.
There should be more career paths than Oash and certain merchant houses that can but won't hire you though.
Merchant houses (and their employees(and some people)) will most definitely hire you. They're not going to go out and post a job position on the message boards, obviously.
When has the rule "You can't or shouldn't do this" ever stopped someo (http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/150506082950-hillary-clinton--las-vegas-5-large-169.jpg)ne who was still willing to do that thi (http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/34913-with-hillary-clinton-corporate-america-defines-the-limits-of-acceptable-opinion)ng if they thought they would get ahead and not get caught?
Quote from: MeTekillot on March 30, 2016, 01:02:22 AM
Merchant houses (and their employees(and some people)) will most definitely hire you. They're not going to go out and post a job position on the message boards, obviously.
When has the rule "You can't or shouldn't do this" ever stopped someo (http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/150506082950-hillary-clinton--las-vegas-5-large-169.jpg)ne who was still willing to do that thi (http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/34913-with-hillary-clinton-corporate-america-defines-the-limits-of-acceptable-opinion)ng if they thought they would get ahead and not get caught?
I was more talking full blown hired, yes I'm aware they can hire my magicker to do X and y and here is you're coins. But I mean coded, actual uniform wearing employee.
Quote from: Vwest on March 26, 2016, 02:29:19 PM
Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 24, 2016, 06:50:46 PMThey were too extreme, too outside the otherwise low-magick gritty fantasy.
Nothing about the game is low magick.
No-thing.
Compared to other settings where everyone has a +3 magic weapon and potions, it is low magick
It's not as rampant as other settings and people should fear it and hate it for the most part... how much you see it depends on how much karma you got and if you want to revile gickers or not I guess. Magickers were already abundant in the game and theme sure, but this makes me cringe to think there will be ranger/gickers flying around and probably sniping you bundled into the kickass of a true guild. I've been nearly dropped with one spell before... one. Putting that on an assassin or ranger means people are going to start sneaking up on you while you tryinng to roleplay and dropping your character in a single spell... I predict a massive rise in the number of hidden gickers and I'm not sure if I like this at all.
The change feels unfair in a lot of ways that aren't part of the game. No one cares if you got dropped out in the sands by a gicker hungry ffor your backpack, sure, but it's unfair we got the people who want to play full elementalists and the peoples whos never got a chance to try them as full guilds. It might be the old man resistance to change in me, but I'm bummed out.
Thats the thing fam.
You don't know if they do got those +3 rings <3
Re: the issue of Sorcerers vs Magickal subguilds
The most recent entry in the weekly update: 03/28/2016 Sorcerer subguilds updated with additional spells
Quote from: Adhira on March 30, 2016, 02:24:13 PM
Re: the issue of Sorcerers vs Magickal subguilds
The most recent entry in the weekly update: 03/28/2016 Sorcerer subguilds updated with additional spells
This is hopeful news. I still don't like the reconfigs of the magick system. I still am annoyed that I can't play a full-on sorc and that no one else can (so I can be their minion or victim or unsuspecting VBFF for a time). I am still very annoyed that I finally earned enough karma to play a Nilazi via special app, and BOOM - thanks for being awesome Lizzie, btw you can't do that afterall, neener neener.
The way I feel - which obviously is just my "feelings" on the matter, not even my opinion - my emotional response only - is to pray I never get any more karma because as soon as I do, something else will be ripped away from my options.
Holy shit. Now I know why Nilazi guild was taken out. It's because Lizzie was almost there to play one :) Crap. The next ones are Muls. Lizzie, wanna go on a spam pking spree together? :D
sorry, couldnt resist
Quote from: Dar on March 30, 2016, 02:52:27 PM
Holy shit. Now I know why Nilazi guild was taken out. It's because Lizzie was almost there to play one :) Crap. The next ones are Muls. Lizzie, wanna go on a spam pking spree together? :D
sorry, couldnt resist
I'm telling you - it's an anti-Lizzie conspiracy. I blame jcarter.
Quote from: Lizzie on March 29, 2016, 06:54:16 PM
Help files are still wrong.
Karma Options http://www.armageddon.org/help/view/Karma%20Options still shows shadow, lightning, and void elementalists still something you can play with the appropriate karma level.
Drovians http://www.armageddon.org/help/view/Drovians still shows that they can be played, at 4 karma.
Nilazi http://www.armageddon.org/help/view/Nilazi still shows they can be played, at 6 karma.
Elkrosans http://www.armageddon.org/help/view/Elkrosians still shows they can be played, at 5 karma
Updated Karma Options. Noted on Drovian/Elkrosian/Nilazi that they're currently not available for play.
Just a quick list of the new help files so far:
http://armageddon.org/help/view/vivaduan
http://armageddon.org/help/view/rukkian
http://armageddon.org/help/view/whiran
http://armageddon.org/help/view/krathi
http://armageddon.org/help/view/elementalist
http://armageddon.org/help/view/spell
http://armageddon.org/help/view/Cantrip
http://armageddon.org/help/view/elemental
http://armageddon.org/help/view/Elemental%20Magick
http://armageddon.org/help/view/touched (New for 3/30/16).
http://armageddon.org/help/view/magick%20aspect
http://armageddon.org/help/view/gemmed
This word "currently" encourages me.
I'm extremely hopeful they get some spells and flavor added to them and put back into the game....
However. If all the nilazi spells simply moved over to the sorcerer subs(and they didn't already have them), I would be 100% okay with that. I kind of feel like they already had them though.
Honestly I feel like they're going to come back. Just, you know. Better? With a question mark because there are some people you can't make happy.
Double dip.
I'm also kind of hoping that full elementalists come back, at the same or similar karma requirements.
Increasing the number of people who can play le evil nilazi could increase intrigue, plots, or just relaxed experiences of tailoring and casting and smoking and being secret and cool in Storm. If they ever decide to make nilazi touched that would be so freaking cool.
The 'touched' help file doesn't really explain what it does.
There's a lot of words and I can't find something in them to criticize, exactly. I've read it over a few times and I have no more understanding of them than I did before I read it the first time. For the purposes of designing a character, some specifics would go a long way.
Example: Characters touched by an element receive three baseline spells at random, as well as a single skill bump in <whatever skill> and <whatever other skill>.
I pulled all of that out of the air, but something like that would be helpful.
Quote from: Vwest on April 06, 2016, 02:17:48 AM
The 'touched' help file doesn't really explain what it does.
There's a lot of words and I can't find something in them to criticize, exactly. I've read it over a few times and I have no more understanding of them than I did before I read it the first time. For the purposes of designing a character, some specifics would go a long way.
Example: Characters touched by an element receive three baseline spells at random, as well as a single skill bump in <whatever skill> and <whatever other skill>.
I pulled all of that out of the air, but something like that would be helpful.
Think of it more as an affinity to the personality of an element + spells.
I'm seeing touched as in more of a general purpose flavor subguild with minor utility. For example, maybe a Krathi warrior will have literal fire in their eyes as the charge into battle, and one who has been battling for years can perhaps even harness that fire in their belly by casting a basic fireball or something. Maybe, in times of thirst, a touched viv will suddenly find their empty canteens full of sparkling, fresh cold water. Somehow, that touched Rukkian just noticed an arrow bounced off of their forehead without hurting them.
EDIT: Like, touched characters could potentially be better than their specific counterparts if done right. If they're like the 'general purpose baby magickers' with no specifications, I'm feeling as if that would be pretty radical.
Even just having ONE spell from each of the three schools would be pretty awesome for 'touched' characters without making them nuts.
Personally, I LOVE cantrips, especially the spells that evoke them in a certain way.
I know staff have done a lot of hard work with these--- but you know what I want? _More_ magick subguilds.
Different and new skills and hidden benefits, the spells would remain basically the same with maybe one addition per subguild that doesn't branch a bunch of other new ones, like, for example, a spell for making sand tools that work excellently, while also being able to get gems out of quarries at a ridiculous pace compared to everyone else.
Gimme a zombie subguild and we're good.
I actually really want to play a touched.
The helpfile doesn't tell us anything about the skills they get unfortunately.
Honestly, all of this has got me super excited.
Thought this means that talking shit = getting hit by any random dude you meet. Any warrior you encounter could also be able to fly, which means that they could theoretically be a superman.
I'm just imagining a half-giant warrior / touched whirian who can fly. Can you imagine how terrifying that could be, to have a half-giant warrior that can be anywhere at any time?
MY DREAM.
I would explore every magick subguild once except the sorcerors. Nothing in the high karma range really catches my interest that isn't elemental.
After that I'd probably stick with half rukkians and half vivs/krathis, even if the nilazi and drovians came back. A quiet life of mental and emotional erosion into moral madness as a nilazi in Storm kind of sounds like fun, though.
Dude, I just realized that the subguild differences for 'touched' subguilds might be different for every guild. Holy shit, the limits are endless.
For example, a whirian-touched ranger may be able to use the winds in conjunction with their archery skills to get INSANE accuracy by making the arrows resistant to falling, which means they would have a unique spell they could be using to 'enchant' their bow of choice.
Or that a Rukkian-touched merchant may be able to oh-so-subtly inbue some of the various clothes and armor they stitch to be extra resistant.
A Krathi-warrior may cleave through armor, and for some reason their blades burn when they strike and damage armor.
A whirian Burglar may be able to snag things from other rooms.
A viv assassin may be able to spit an extremely deadly venom from their mouths that they are immune to, but that others it causes an extremely deadly sickness.
I am excited, especially about the touched (less useful to the templarate if the vague hints in the helpfiles are anything, seem to be more general and random in nature) and I sort of wonder---- say, in another world, they bring the full elementalists back or they never left at all. What about a rukkian/stone touched? Do they get even better boosts to earth-based skills? Slightly faster mana regeneration? It would be soooo cool if there were a few rare ones among all the elementalists who were truly and innately -better-, oooh for IC reasons too, or else they are simply the Goku and Vegeta among the world saviors--- key fighters in any ultimate battle, who are at worst extremely useful as any kind of witch off-site.
Sure its gamebreaking enough to become high karma all around, but that would help the natural rarity of the talented elite. These people could easily become the head mage of the quarter (there was such a thing at least once) or (random idea) someone could get water touched and simply work their way up through hard work to become an elder mage. Leave the subguilds in if the full guilds come back--- make being talented difficult.
Oooh, so you think the Touched have a chance to become a full blown mage if they work -really- hard at it?
I think magick is interesting as hell, and honestly I think having maybe two allowed full-elementalist guild of every type at once would be pretty nice. Kinda like a special role for Templars, how there can only be so many at once to make sure the game is well balanced.
But that begs the question:
If someone DOES take a full elementalist of one element-
CAN THEY BE TOUCHED BY ANOTHER ELEMENT?
WOULDN'T IT BE GOD DAMN RADICAL TO HAVE MULTI-ELEMENT ELEMENTALISTS?
[MOMENTARY INAUDIBLE SCREAMING]
Imagine playing a Krath-touched Drovian who would spew out freezing cold fire that left frostburn on people instead of regular burns?
OR a elk-touched viv who could BLAST people with electrified water, or make water that restored stamina on each sip
A nil-touched whirian who could literally travel to other dimensions by tearing fucking holes in reality.
I could even see the mixes of all of the elementalist and touch combos give very specific utility spells.
A Krathi/Ruk could manipulate and create lava like a volcano, which could function kinda like Kryl acid by burning the shit out of armor and leaving permanent scars on characters on a critical hit, and could potentially do damage over time until it hardened up and fell off.
A Krathi/Whirian could maybe manipulate gases, and maybe make smokescreens and poison fogs for super sneaky tactics.
A Krath/Viv wouldn't work because they're mutually exclusive.
A Krath/Drovian could blast people with fire that saps heat out of people and gives them frostbite as previously stated, could also perhaps give people hypothermia which is cured by being in a not cold place.
A Krath/Nil would be the fucking champion of the game of denying and destroying magical abilities, even going as far as to maybe even hit people with curses that burned people every single time they tried to do magic, effectively magically castrating them for a while.
---
A Vivian/Ruk would be able to manipulate and control plant life. Imagine being so powerful as to grow a fruit-bearing tree in the middle of the god damn desert?
A Vivian/Whirian would be able to heal people over long distances, if very minorly, and with great difficulty, but being able to literally take someone from death's doorstep from all the way across the known to a point where they're not dying is insanely valuable.
A Vivian/Krathi wouldn't be able to work because, again, mutally explusive.
A Vivian/Drovian would be able to probably create a temporary steel-like armor that could provide the best defense in the entire game.
A Vivian/Nil would be the fucking master of life and death, and be able to actually, if at great personal cost and great preparation, restore life to the deceased, but only for a while. I'm thinking that there would be an OOC 30 day time limit after they've revived that character for them to play before the magic fails and they are dead again permanently. Give them the ability to say goodbye, to fight in that one last battle where they wish to achieve their true death. Maybe even cause them to slowly degenerate and skeletonize as they reach nearer and nearer to death with their stats slowly dropping each day.
---
Those are just some shit ideas I have if that were to ever happen, but alas, that's too much power for some people to have, maybe...?
What if staff are building an empath class a la Sylar in Heroes? :o Just kidding, kind of.
vivaduan/krathi would expulse immensely hot jets of steam and sow confusion and despair into the ranks of their enemies, blinding them and burning them.
Quote from: evilcabbage on April 07, 2016, 12:47:33 PM
vivaduan/krathi would expulse immensely hot jets of steam and sow confusion and despair into the ranks of their enemies, blinding them and burning them.
And open pores for a beautiful, shiny skin.
I don't really like the immense variety a 2-karma dude has over a 0-karma either, but I can't think of a viable solution.
Quote from: Nessalin-Fixed crashbug related to picking up books with bad data in them.
Well crap. There goes my
Snow Crash character concept.
"Oooh, so you think the Touched have a chance to become a full blown mage if they work -really- hard at it?"
That will never happen without asking prior.
And even then I doubt they will give you full magicker.
The same way with not giving full sorcs.
Yo. I just thought of this sick idea.
What if... each elemental subguild could learn all of an element's spells, but... the one they chose is the one they're most a kin to? Yeah?
Let's say a rukkian protection dood can use protection spells like for as much energy as they do now, but... when it wants to use empowerment spells it costs double or even tripple or even four times the amount? - or they can't use any power level above kral or something.
Yeah?
Quote from: Chettaman on April 13, 2016, 08:18:15 AM
Yo. I just thought of this sick idea.
What if... each elemental subguild could learn all of an element's spells, but... the one they chose is the one they're most a kin to? Yeah?
Let's say a rukkian protection dood can use protection spells like for as much energy as they do now, but... when it wants to use empowerment spells it costs double or even tripple or even four times the amount? - or they can't use any power level above kral or something.
Yeah?
Thats a terrible..." or they can't use any power level above kral or something."
Hey thats pretty good
Quote from: Chettaman on April 13, 2016, 08:18:15 AM
Yo. I just thought of this sick idea.
What if... each elemental subguild could learn all of an element's spells, but... the one they chose is the one they're most a kin to? Yeah?
Let's say a rukkian protection dood can use protection spells like for as much energy as they do now, but... when it wants to use empowerment spells it costs double or even tripple or even four times the amount? - or they can't use any power level above kral or something.
Yeah?
You mean elemental magick main guilds would end up working similarly to how mundane main guilds work, where the PC is better at some aspects of their guild than others, but they are capable of using all the skills in their guild? I could totally get on board with that.
Quote from: Chettaman on April 13, 2016, 08:18:15 AM
Yo. I just thought of this sick idea.
What if... each elemental subguild could learn all of an element's spells, but... the one they chose is the one they're most a kin to? Yeah?
Let's say a rukkian protection dood can use protection spells like for as much energy as they do now, but... when it wants to use empowerment spells it costs double or even tripple or even four times the amount? - or they can't use any power level above kral or something.
Yeah?
triple is too much.
double is just fine.
"What if... each elemental subguild could learn all of an element's spells, but... the one they chose is the one they're most a kin to? Yeah?
Let's say a rukkian protection dood can use protection spells like for as much energy as they do now, but... when it wants to use empowerment spells it costs double or even tripple or even four times the amount? - or they can't use any power level above kral or something."
Pretty good idea, actually, to have that be the case, if it isn't already!
This allows for a mage to be a proper 'mage' still and not neuter them from having all the abilities of a mage, but gives them the specialization in a certain subgroup to limit their mastery of choices. This means that a fire mage can still burn nerds even if that isn't their specialization, even though it's weaker than a straight up war mage, that a viv can still make water, even if it isn't their forte. This would keep with the existing lore while promoting good balance gameplay-wise.
Touched should also follow this same pattern, only with no specializations, but instead of a lower balance on the power scale, it should be raised to a middling point instead, with no ability for mastery in any ability, but more of a 'jack of all trades' in that case rather than a specialized subset.
Quote from: AdamBlue on April 22, 2016, 01:12:53 AM
"What if... each elemental subguild could learn all of an element's spells, but... the one they chose is the one they're most a kin to? Yeah?
Let's say a rukkian protection dood can use protection spells like for as much energy as they do now, but... when it wants to use empowerment spells it costs double or even tripple or even four times the amount? - or they can't use any power level above kral or something."
Pretty good idea, actually, to have that be the case, if it isn't already!
This allows for a mage to be a proper 'mage' still and not neuter them from having all the abilities of a mage, but gives them the specialization in a certain subgroup to limit their mastery of choices. This means that a fire mage can still burn nerds even if that isn't their specialization, even though it's weaker than a straight up war mage, that a viv can still make water, even if it isn't their forte. This would keep with the existing lore while promoting good balance gameplay-wise.
Touched should also follow this same pattern, only with no specializations, but instead of a lower balance on the power scale, it should be raised to a middling point instead, with no ability for mastery in any ability, but more of a 'jack of all trades' in that case rather than a specialized subset.
I think I posted saying I could get into this idea on another page of the thread. I still could get into it.
It's kinda like this.
-ALL- Whirans should be able to fly at some point, but not ALL whirans should be good at it, you get my drift?
I mean, they tire of 'just walking', it says in the files. Which means that there's a group that are experts at flying (travel), there are the touched who would be -decent- at flying, to a mid-point but never achieving true greatness, and then there would be a Whiran invested into another school of whirian abilities who can fly, but isn't very good at it.
This would make touched, while less karma in cost, much more viable in some circumstances than a specialized member of the schools, but NEVER reaching a point in greatness as grand as some can with certain spells, you dig?
No.
Quote from: BadSkeelz on April 22, 2016, 01:56:43 PM
No.
good post
Give all whirans fly 2k16
I didn't even know they all couldn't.
Or maybe they can.
This stuff actually tempted me to get back into the game in order to explore it a little bit.
I think the fear of OP-ness is overstated in most cases. I can't think of many single spells that were just complete game-winners without combination with other spells, and it sounds like most of those combos have been eliminated, due to the divergent aspects.
The one I picked...one spell I probably won't ever use except at nil just to see if it branches anything; one attack spell that I probably would only use for flair or out of boredom; one utility spell that will be extremely useful for PvP, but not until I get to around 15-20 days played into the LONG-ASS GRIND of my primary guild, and not really -safe- to use unless I team up with another mage type who can hook me up with a combo spell. Kind of underwhelmed, to be honest. One spell that I can't really use to great effect until I'm already a mundane badass. I'll have to wait and see what they branch, I suppose.
Quote from: Synthesis on August 04, 2016, 04:12:51 PM
The one I picked...one spell I probably won't ever use except at nil just to see if it branches anything; one attack spell that I probably would only use for flair or out of boredom; one utility spell that will be extremely useful for PvP, but not until I get to around 15-20 days played into the LONG-ASS GRIND of my primary guild, and not really -safe- to use unless I team up with another mage type who can hook me up with a combo spell. Kind of underwhelmed, to be honest. One spell that I can't really use to great effect until I'm already a mundane badass. I'll have to wait and see what they branch, I suppose.
This is about how I felt as well, just generally underwhelmed and wishing I was playing a real mage.
I agree its kinda underwhelming. You are giving up a lot of utility and still have to grind your main class.
Your spells won't save you when you need them the most.
The statements "Still have to grind my main class" make me chuckle. Kind of hints on how quickly a full mage could become obliteratingly powerful compared to mundane classes and how important that little aspect was to playing a mage class.
Quote from: Dar on August 05, 2016, 11:55:34 AM
The statements "Still have to grind my main class" make me chuckle. Kind of hints on how quickly a full mage could become obliteratingly powerful compared to mundane classes and how important that little aspect was to playing a mage class.
I, for one, am glad that witches now have main guilds. I'm actually /very/ afraid of them now. Before I was a little afraid, but now that I know there might be a ranger out there somewhere that could hit me with arrows OR ride up on me, charge me, trample me and then begin combat with super-powers... I'm afraid of everyone I see out in the desert.
still miss the magick main guilds.
I just want Nilazi back. I'd pay all my karma just to get them back in the game, subguilded or no.
I imagine they'll eventually get around to subguilding the rest of the magick elements if things go well enough with the four primary elements.
Has anyone actually run into an uber-charging fireball-slinging Doom Ranger yet, or is this like...more of a theoretical concern at this point?
Quote from: Synthesis on August 05, 2016, 01:41:20 PM
I imagine they'll eventually get around to subguilding the rest of the magick elements if things go well enough with the four primary elements.
Has anyone actually run into an uber-charging fireball-slinging Doom Ranger yet, or is this like...more of a theoretical concern at this point?
The meta is krathis burglars and ranger whirans, silly.
I've yet to actually run into one.
Quote from: Synthesis on August 05, 2016, 01:41:20 PM
I imagine they'll eventually get around to subguilding the rest of the magick elements if things go well enough with the four primary elements.
Has anyone actually run into an uber-charging fireball-slinging Doom Ranger yet, or is this like...more of a theoretical concern at this point?
Nope. The most frightening are still the "full" magickers which are still in game.
Quote from: Majikal on August 05, 2016, 01:19:01 PM
Quote from: Chettaman on August 05, 2016, 12:29:26 PM
still miss the magick main guilds.
We all do. :(
I wonder what general consensus is about these subguilds now that they have been out for a little while. Did we loose something or gain something?
Just from what I've observed I'd say we've lost something. But that might have something to do with the fact that it feels like the subs were made intentionally weak for some reason. Dunno, I'm still pretty underwhelmed by the whole thing and don't see any I have an actual interest in playing. And I looooove me some magickers.
Quote from: Norcal on August 05, 2016, 03:52:52 PM
Quote from: Majikal on August 05, 2016, 01:19:01 PM
Quote from: Chettaman on August 05, 2016, 12:29:26 PM
still miss the magick main guilds.
We all do. :(
I wonder what general consensus is about these subguilds now that they have been out for a little while. Did we loose something or gain something?
They've only been in since March, right?
I don't think that's long enough for even the first round of mundane primary/magick subguild PCs to get awesome.
Why were they removed again?
Wasn't the reason something like.
"Staff added it in the past and it was dumb so we took it out now"?
I disagree with Synthesis. I know a few main guild/magick subguilds (Okay like one) Thats pretty awesome already.
Quote from: Jihelu on August 05, 2016, 04:00:11 PM
Why were they removed again?
Wasn't the reason something like.
"Staff added it in the past and it was dumb so we took it out now"?
I disagree with Synthesis. I know a few main guild/magick subguilds (Okay like one) Thats pretty awesome already.
Theorycraft awesome, or actually in-game and melting faces awesome?
Non-gemmed magickers and their visible effects remain rare, at least from my characters' perspectives since implementation.
.
The only major problem I have with the obvious shift for Low Fantasy, is that the game is still designed that a LOT of content and discoveries aren't really feasible without magick. Whether its some region in the mountains, or something SO GREAT a distance that someone with normal playing times is not likely to reach to discover it.
Watering down magick so that its more of a Low Fantasy world... alright. I like the idea that anyone COULD have magick, and most that do are kinda shit at it. But the idea that there COULD be someone who is just balls-to-the-wall magickal style is frightening. And it also means there are magickers you would want to find or have become a colleague if you really want to go somewhere. If you need a viv along to keep people watered and free of poisons, now you have to find someone who rolled the right kind of Viv, whereas before you could at least find someone in the Water Temple and bribe them.
But then, there's not much content in the game where you'd need a touch of magick, that won't have staff "making the world come alive" for you anyway. And by "come alive" I mean "SURPRISE THERE'S A GITH SORCEROR IN THAT SAND DUNE AHAHA"
I played one of the last Whirans and from that perspective it was odd to meet 4 other whirans, none of which could fly with me =\ lame. I've seen enough of the different subs to see mostly/all of what they're capable of and, while neat, I honestly didn't care for the skillsets and only find the appeal of them to be in twinky combinations. Oh, empowerment Assassin, check out ma shweet backstabz and so on.
One of my favorite things was sitting around with mages and discussing the idea behind magick, mentoring new mages, bringing the lore to life about magick etc. Those that have played around Majikal's long-lived majickal pc's experienced their fair share of mah luv for it I'm sure. I feel like the mage subs really destroyed the roleplay that centered around magick. Breaking the spells up into roughly thirds just gave mages even less things in common with other mages. The fact that out of 5 whirans I was the only one capable of a particular spell, one that the has forever been the staple of being a whiran was very :'(
Edit to add:
I also hate checking my play options and seeing 5guilds and 253 subguilds. When I got tired of ranger/warrior/assassin I would play a mage, now it doesn't feel like a lot of variables for the core of pc's, though this will supposedly get fixed when the guild changes roll out.
Quote from: Majikal on August 05, 2016, 05:04:52 PM
I played one of the last Whirans and from that perspective it was odd to meet 4 other whirans, none of which could fly with me =\ lame. I've seen enough of the different subs to see mostly/all of what they're capable of and, while neat, I honestly didn't care for the skillsets and only find the appeal of them to be in twinky combinations. Oh, empowerment Assassin, check out ma shweet backstabz and so on.
One of my favorite things was sitting around with mages and discussing the idea behind magick, mentoring new mages, bringing the lore to life about magick etc. Those that have played around Majikal's long-lived majickal pc's experienced their fair share of mah luv for it I'm sure. I feel like the mage subs really destroyed the roleplay that centered around magick. Breaking the spells up into roughly thirds just gave mages even less things in common with other mages. The fact that out of 5 whirans I was the only one capable of a particular spell, one that the has forever been the staple of being a whiran was very :'(
Edit to add:
I also hate checking my play options and seeing 5guilds and 253 subguilds. When I got tired of ranger/warrior/assassin I would play a mage, now it doesn't feel like a lot of variables for the core of pc's, though this will supposedly get fixed when the guild changes roll out.
Yes, I was afraid that might be the way it went..I hope they fix it, or at least consider that it is broken.
Quote from: Dar on August 05, 2016, 11:55:34 AM
The statements "Still have to grind my main class" make me chuckle. Kind of hints on how quickly a full mage could become obliteratingly powerful compared to mundane classes and how important that little aspect was to playing a mage class.
The point was that for those people that thought magicker sub-guilds were going to be game breakingly OP: Not really.
You give up alot of utility from a mundane sub-class.
You are isolated or risk it from using your spells.
You still have to grind your main guild to be able to do stuff.
Your spells will not help you when it matters.
The mage explorer will still die unless they know what they are doing, and its more interesting doing it with a clan/small team. Lastly, priority agility, poison arrow, and spice is still a damn good way to gank people if thats all you care about doing. However, if you just want to roleplaying someone who can cast magick then its is probably better then it has ever has been before in this regard.
I personally think this change is good, and I don't want to see full magickers, or any more magicker sub-guilds added. That said, I can defiantely see one or two Quality of life changes to magickal sub-guilds if only so people think twice about attacking someone they suspect being a mage. :-\
Quote from: Majikal on August 05, 2016, 05:04:52 PM
I played one of the last Whirans and from that perspective it was odd to meet 4 other whirans, none of which could fly with me =\ lame. I've seen enough of the different subs to see mostly/all of what they're capable of and, while neat, I honestly didn't care for the skillsets and only find the appeal of them to be in twinky combinations. Oh, empowerment Assassin, check out ma shweet backstabz and so on.
One of my favorite things was sitting around with mages and discussing the idea behind magick, mentoring new mages, bringing the lore to life about magick etc. Those that have played around Majikal's long-lived majickal pc's experienced their fair share of mah luv for it I'm sure. I feel like the mage subs really destroyed the roleplay that centered around magick. Breaking the spells up into roughly thirds just gave mages even less things in common with other mages. The fact that out of 5 whirans I was the only one capable of a particular spell, one that the has forever been the staple of being a whiran was very :'(
Edit to add:
I also hate checking my play options and seeing 5guilds and 253 subguilds. When I got tired of ranger/warrior/assassin I would play a mage, now it doesn't feel like a lot of variables for the core of pc's, though this will supposedly get fixed when the guild changes roll out.
Annndddd......this. Very much this. A lot.
I've had very few gickers, but there is a huge difference in deep, interactive, character development scenes about magick, and they are missed. Almost like the magick aspect of the character is diminished, a less important part of them, while the main guild is the focus. Yes a few exceptions as in all things, but in the norm...
As far as thinking that 'some' of those gicker combinations are not OP. I'm sorry, but you ... dont ... know. It is a lot easier to hide being a magicker right now. Which means most dedicated rogue mage subguilds are not being overt until they are buff enough to handle being known.
One day, you'll have to go chase one down, then you'll see.
It is true though, that the mages are no longer instant machines of doom within 3 days played. That's gone. But make it 10 days and they're scarier then a full mage of 30 days. Make it a 30 day and ... I'd be scared. Very very very scared. More Scared and more wary then I ever was (oocly), of a full mage.
To an extent that's correct. I'm 100 percent sure I could roll up a mundane/mage combo and become terrifying in relatively short order. But that's mostly because you have amazing mundane combat skills and just a few spells that synergize well with that. But becoming that terrifying slightly-less-than-mundane of doom isn't really my goal in Arm anymore. I'm of the opinion that they just don't seem like mages now. They're just warriors/rangers/whatever with buffs or a little extra damage.
Most of the subs seem pretty lackluster with one or two exceptions.
Give it time. I've played one of the new magickers, and I've been playing gickers about one out of every three chars since I even got the chance. The last one I played had so much freaking potential it was ridiculous. I mean, given a year with that char, I could have been one of the most powerful of 'chosen guild' out there, quickly, and easily. Too bad I had to play realisitically, man was he a fucked in the head guy. Anyhow, give it time. I'm going to murder you all in the sexiest way possible, it's gonna be crazy.
Maybe there aren't one man death machines roaming around now, yet, but most of you haven't died and gotten the chance to tinker. Us quick shot people have, and well, we've been quick shots. However, the idea of someone with a terrifying, dizzyingly array of spells that can obliterate you is still out there. The Sorcerer. And they should be scarier, especially to elementalists.
On the other hand, give me four warriors, each with a badass magick subguild, and you have a clan of krath-damned monsters. Or even better, A ranger, two warriors, and an assasin. No longer will blood orgies just be a mudsex thing. It's going to be a stepping out into the Salt Flats thing, because rogues are now more insane, or can be, once you guys put them to use.
I will miss having a large pool of spells, and making all of my coin off my jeweler subguild with my rukkian dwarf (never happened, but you know who you are), but I still have had in depth magical roleplay scenes, excellent reactions, and plenty of fun. Then again, I turn ridiculous, near impossible char ideas into fun shit all of the time.
Quote from: Raptor_Dan on August 06, 2016, 12:03:18 AM
Anyhow, give it time. I'm going to murder you all in the sexiest way possible, it's gonna be crazy.
Teach me, senpai.
I could teach you, but..... I'd have to charge.
Charge
(Melee Combat)
This skill causes a highly skilled rider to attempt to knock down an opponent while mounted on an animal. Upon success, the victim will be knocked over and left on the ground (if he/she was not already there). This leaves the victim prone to attack and disables his/her ability to do things other than stand. This skill, while combative in nature, is primarily available to rangers, half-elves, and expert riders who have a greater rapport with animals, since such maneuvers require expert control over the animal.
Quote from: Raptor_Dan on August 06, 2016, 12:03:18 AM
Give it time. I've played one of the new magickers, and I've been playing gickers about one out of every three chars since I even got the chance. The last one I played had so much freaking potential it was ridiculous. I mean, given a year with that char, I could have been one of the most powerful of 'chosen guild' out there, quickly, and easily. Too bad I had to play realisitically, man was he a fucked in the head guy. Anyhow, give it time. I'm going to murder you all in the sexiest way possible, it's gonna be crazy.
Maybe there aren't one man death machines roaming around now, yet, but most of you haven't died and gotten the chance to tinker. Us quick shot people have, and well, we've been quick shots. However, the idea of someone with a terrifying, dizzyingly array of spells that can obliterate you is still out there. The Sorcerer. And they should be scarier, especially to elementalists.
On the other hand, give me four warriors, each with a badass magick subguild, and you have a clan of krath-damned monsters. Or even better, A ranger, two warriors, and an assasin. No longer will blood orgies just be a mudsex thing. It's going to be a stepping out into the Salt Flats thing, because rogues are now more insane, or can be, once you guys put them to use.
I will miss having a large pool of spells, and making all of my coin off my jeweler subguild with my rukkian dwarf (never happened, but you know who you are), but I still have had in depth magical roleplay scenes, excellent reactions, and plenty of fun. Then again, I turn ridiculous, near impossible char ideas into fun shit all of the time.
If four awesome warriors roll up on you, they're pretty much going to instagib you whether they have spells or not, soooo....
Quote from: Synthesis on August 05, 2016, 01:41:20 PM
I imagine they'll eventually get around to subguilding the rest of the magick elements if things go well enough with the four primary elements.
I hope you're right, but http://gdb.armageddon.org/index.php/topic,51298.0.html (http://gdb.armageddon.org/index.php/topic,51298.0.html) seems to suggest otherwise :-\
Quote from: Synthesis on August 06, 2016, 03:08:54 AM
Quote from: Raptor_Dan on August 06, 2016, 12:03:18 AM
Give it time. I've played one of the new magickers, and I've been playing gickers about one out of every three chars since I even got the chance. The last one I played had so much freaking potential it was ridiculous. I mean, given a year with that char, I could have been one of the most powerful of 'chosen guild' out there, quickly, and easily. Too bad I had to play realisitically, man was he a fucked in the head guy. Anyhow, give it time. I'm going to murder you all in the sexiest way possible, it's gonna be crazy.
Maybe there aren't one man death machines roaming around now, yet, but most of you haven't died and gotten the chance to tinker. Us quick shot people have, and well, we've been quick shots. However, the idea of someone with a terrifying, dizzyingly array of spells that can obliterate you is still out there. The Sorcerer. And they should be scarier, especially to elementalists.
On the other hand, give me four warriors, each with a badass magick subguild, and you have a clan of krath-damned monsters. Or even better, A ranger, two warriors, and an assasin. No longer will blood orgies just be a mudsex thing. It's going to be a stepping out into the Salt Flats thing, because rogues are now more insane, or can be, once you guys put them to use.
I will miss having a large pool of spells, and making all of my coin off my jeweler subguild with my rukkian dwarf (never happened, but you know who you are), but I still have had in depth magical roleplay scenes, excellent reactions, and plenty of fun. Then again, I turn ridiculous, near impossible char ideas into fun shit all of the time.
If four awesome warriors roll up on you, they're pretty much going to instagib you whether they have spells or not, soooo....
Ayup.
I am still not sure why we cannot have both. You could limit the full mages to a higher karma or even special apps. Yet we should still have them. Oh yes..Low fantasy. Still not sold on that one, yet perhaps I should speak to one of the sorcerer kings about it, they seem like real low fantasy sorts.
Why are we still complaining about this? Good golly.
Quote from: boog on August 06, 2016, 05:05:27 PM
Why are we still complaining about this? Good golly.
Because people still don't like it, and given that these sort of changes take time to see impacts, that means people will be checking in on it time to time.
It's the same reason I waited a little while to do my check in with Ask the Staff...but my stance is a different one. Thusfar, my concerns have been debunked, so I am content. But people with other concerns who were more into the magickal scene obviously still want to input information. I don't think there's anything wrong with that. But fuck mages. :P
I'd just do away with them entirely. ;) Gick fingers.
Haha, let's just do a game split. One all mundanes and the other nothing but elementalists, sorcerers and psionicists. Frankly I'd split my time between both because they'd be completely different types of fun. (but mostly the magick one)
The new system is fine for what it does. I think players just pine for the old guilds because it was a break from the soul crushing mundane grind.
Quote from: Jingo on August 06, 2016, 06:55:18 PM
The new system is fine for what it does. I think players just pine for the old guilds because it was a break from the soul crushing mundane grind.
My soul is a tiny penny smear on rail road tracks and I love it. ;D
Wasn't that also one of the things that was asked for, though. For magickal guilds to not be so defined by their magick? I know when I talked about subguilds and extended subguilds, it was said it wasn't enough.
Quote from: Jingo on August 06, 2016, 06:55:18 PM
The new system is fine for what it does. I think players just pine for the old guilds because it was a break from the soul crushing mundane grind.
Quote from: Armaddict on August 06, 2016, 06:58:01 PM
Quote from: Jingo on August 06, 2016, 06:55:18 PM
The new system is fine for what it does. I think players just pine for the old guilds because it was a break from the soul crushing mundane grind.
My soul is a tiny penny smear on rail road tracks and I love it. ;D
Wasn't that also one of the things that was asked for, though. For magickal guilds to not be so defined by their magick? I know when I talked about subguilds and extended subguilds, it was said it wasn't enough.
And yeah. Some people really enjoy that slow progress. I'm not really one of those people.
Well last I heard main guild changes would bring something that would help with the grind. Though not sure when that might be...
Quote from: RogueGunslinger on March 13, 2016, 04:07:09 AM
I wonder when we're going to start seeing these.
I guess I'm more sanguine about it because I've never had a magicker that was part of any kind of magick "scene." None of my 'gickers ever got past "squishy noob" status, and the only awesome mages I ever met were either sorcs or bahaks.
Now that I think about it...I keep getting tempted by "badass" subclasses or extended subclasses, but I think all of my longest-living (and most skilled) PCs were just plain-old mundane primary/subclass crafters.
I'm not really concerned about people becoming ultimate badasses in the mundane field, then dominating everyone with a surprise magick subclass, because...eh...it takes waaaay too long to get to mundane badassery to blow it by going out and doing dumb shit with magick just because you can.
Well, after seeing how it's played out for a while, I think that:
* having sub guild elems is cool, although some combinations are silly and seem more about get gud than RP
* not having main guild elems when subs and ext subs are much better feels a lot weaker and outside of theme. We should have some limits on PC numbers in gick mainguilds, or bind all of them to a clan in some way, barring some allowance for rogues, but I miss them a lot and I don't even like playing them much
* loss of Nilazi is balls
* loss of Drovian is a big improvement and I think moving away from having magickal surveillance being king of intelligence plots is wise - it makes things more chaotic and involve more PCs and takes more guesswork
* bring back some proper sorcs or at least half sorcs or something. Fuck it. Bring back SotD.
Quote from: Case on August 10, 2016, 05:37:28 PM
Well, after seeing how it's played out for a while, I think that:
* having sub guild elems is cool, although some combinations are silly and seem more about get gud than RP
* not having main guild elems when subs and ext subs are much better feels a lot weaker and outside of theme. We should have some limits on PC numbers in gick mainguilds, or bind all of them to a clan in some way, barring some allowance for rogues, but I miss them a lot and I don't even like playing them much
* loss of Nilazi is balls
* loss of Drovian is a big improvement and I think moving away from having magickal surveillance being king of intelligence plots is wise - it makes things more chaotic and involve more PCs and takes more guesswork
* bring back some proper sorcs or at least half sorcs or something. Fuck it. Bring back SotD.
+1
Quote from: Case on August 10, 2016, 05:37:28 PM
Well, after seeing how it's played out for a while, I think that:
* having sub guild elems is cool, although some combinations are silly and seem more about get gud than RP
* not having main guild elems when subs and ext subs are much better feels a lot weaker and outside of theme. We should have some limits on PC numbers in gick mainguilds, or bind all of them to a clan in some way, barring some allowance for rogues, but I miss them a lot and I don't even like playing them much
* loss of Nilazi is balls
* loss of Drovian is a big improvement and I think moving away from having magickal surveillance being king of intelligence plots is wise - it makes things more chaotic and involve more PCs and takes more guesswork
* bring back some proper sorcs or at least half sorcs or something. Fuck it. Bring back SotD.
To be fair: none of the currently-available combos will ever be as "git gud" as a full krathi was.
All the current combos would be good and scary without being overly OP...if they remove that one restriction.
I'm pretty happy with how current sorcs work in comparison to subguild elementalists.
Not happy about losing full guild elementalists, but if you bring them back you gotta bring back full sorcs.
Quote from: Delirium on August 10, 2016, 10:45:02 PM
I'm pretty happy with how current sorcs work in comparison to subguild elementalists.
Not happy about losing full guild elementalists, but if you bring them back you gotta bring back full sorcs.
Not sure how feasible this idea would be, as far as code is concerned, but..
Why not bring full magicker guilds back (elementalist and sorcerer) but make them something that a character has to seek for, IG and IC? A Ranger/Rukkian has to actively work at being a magicker, increasing their power to the extend that they naturally can achieve, and then once they've maxxed their sub-guild they have to submit a special app. and get approval to pursue the IG goal of "going beyond" themselves and becoming a fully fledged magicker. They would then be able to branch the full spell tree for their magicker guild (or add spells normally not available to their sub-guild, not necessarily all spells) but with the trade off that they take a hit to their main guild skills. Maybe remove their ability to branch.
Just a thought.
Quote from: Pale Horse on August 10, 2016, 11:17:10 PM
Quote from: Delirium on August 10, 2016, 10:45:02 PM
I'm pretty happy with how current sorcs work in comparison to subguild elementalists.
Not happy about losing full guild elementalists, but if you bring them back you gotta bring back full sorcs.
Not sure how feasible this idea would be, as far as code is concerned, but..
Why not bring full magicker guilds back (elementalist and sorcerer) but make them something that a character has to seek for, IG and IC? A Ranger/Rukkian has to actively work at being a magicker, increasing their power to the extend that they naturally can achieve, and then once they've maxxed their sub-guild they have to submit a special app. and get approval to pursue the IG goal of "going beyond" themselves and becoming a fully fledged magicker. They would then be able to branch the full spell tree for their magicker guild (or add spells normally not available to their sub-guild, not necessarily all spells) but with the trade off that they take a hit to their main guild skills. Maybe remove their ability to branch.
Just a thought.
This is how a smaller game/player base would probably approach the issue, as it cares to an individuals needs and wants.
Sadly this sort of thing doesnt' seem to happen much. Not even saying it's a bad thing.
I think full guild sorcs could only be justified as sponsored roles and with total staff supervision. Much like with Templars.
In fact. I don't know why staff didn't just treat them this way to begin with.
Quote from: Jingo on August 10, 2016, 11:56:21 PM
I think full guild sorcs could only be justified as sponsored roles and with total staff supervision. Much like with Templars.
In fact. I don't know why staff didn't just treat them this way to begin with.
Probably the reasons I gave.
"This is how a smaller game/player base would probably approach the issue, as it cares to an individuals needs and wants."
Though I feel like a full sorcerer would add a threat to the game. Therefor interaction. Therefore more than just the individual. Especially with staff assistant.
Idea for this based on my previous experience with an unusual non-sponsored setup that happened to my "normal" pre-change whiran as a result of IC events:
Restore main elemental guilds excluding drov, elkros, and nilaz, and restore sorcerer main guild as playable.
Make ALL main magick-based guilds require gathering in order to acquire mana, with sorcs getting the *option* to defile if they want.
Increase the duration of magickally-created things that are intended to be temporary (or have temporary effects) but also include a method of removing/neutralizing those things with minimal "cost."
Retain elemental subguilds, as is (no gathering required), but ditch the "touched by" category. It sounds good on paper but I don't think it pans out very well.
Eliminate the current sorcerer subguilds entirely in exchange for the singular main full-on sorc.
Make it so there are no more than 4 sorc PC apps approved at any given time - I suggest 4 because this will typically result in only 1-2 of them alive and actually playing on a regular basis, which is exactly what you want. If you only allow 1-2, it's possible you won't ever see any sorcery at all, and that'll just piss off the players who always wanted to play one and can't :)
Good lord, if elementalists could gather they would be insanely more powerful in the long game. I have to vote no.
Quote from: Jingo on August 10, 2016, 11:56:21 PM
I think full guild sorcs could only be justified as sponsored roles and with total staff supervision. Much like with Templars.
In fact. I don't know why staff didn't just treat them this way to begin with.
Probably because that takes a lot of work and trust on both ends for what ends up being generally an iso role instead of a clan and player leading flavor role. Templars get attention because they set the scene for a huge web of plotlines. Most sorcerers either aren't able to or don't involve a quarter as many PCs. I don't even know if I'd want to see skill bumped sorcerers player run for specific plots. In the end days, even really great players seemed to fumble some of these.
That said, I love and miss sorcerers. I don't think they were broken. They possibly needed more call and response staff side for some actions and plotlines, at least after they'd become established. The new sorcerer subs are very cool, though. It's frightening thinking how stealth they could be.
A tremendously powerful character that adds little to the game sounds like a fundamentally busted role to me.
Quote from: BadSkeelz on August 11, 2016, 12:47:33 PM
A tremendously powerful character that adds little to the game sounds like a fundamentally busted role to me.
Here's a role where you can rule the world with. Only... you can't go to any city and are doomed to live in solitude in the occasional cave sans quit room.
Quote from: Dresan on August 10, 2016, 10:09:41 PM
All the current combos would be good and scary without being overly OP...if they remove that one restriction.
I always thought the whole "scary if and only if you can somehow avoid being instagibbed or reel-locked while casting" thing was lame.
However, that's now only a problem for the elemental subguilds that have direct-damage spells with no stealth primary, and don't have access to items that we all know about but we're not going to say it because whatever. If you have sneak+hide on your primary guild, chances are you can get off a doom fart before anyone can keyword you, then you just have to have an alias or macro ready to get your weapons out. If you have those other things, it isn't really an issue, but from my reading of the help files, none of the subguilds that have easy access to those things have direct-damage spells, so it requires you to use the buddy system.
*shrug* Not a big deal. Warriors and merchants are the only two primaries that don't get a version of sneak+hide. Merchant/magickers probably aren't going to be in the face-blasting game anyway. Warrior defense can get high enough that you can go bare-handed for a minute and not get rekt too badly, unless you're fighting a HG or something...and warriors git gud enough on their own that 9 times out of 10 you don't need no stupid direct-damage spell in the first place. So...magickers are still scary.
The metagame is probably something like:
sneaky/squishy types are going to pick either direct-damage, added stealth, or something that mitigates a critical weakness
nobody is going to roll merch/magickers except to be contradictory
rangers are probably mostly going to go with magick subguilds that prevent them from relying on mounts, because the ranger primary is fucking badass in all other regards (unless you don't have the extreme patience required to become a badass ranger primary)
warriors/magickers should go with flee-mitigation magick effects, because flee has always been the only effective defense against a badass warrior (if you're getting into the PK game), otherwise you want your warrior to be an ubertank, and there are a couple of magick subguilds that would probably work for that. On the other hand, if you don't have the extreme patience required to -actually- get to be a badass warrior primary, you might pick some other things.
But...that's just me thinking out loud about the most "effective" combos for rogue-mage or off-peak types. As a peak-time gemmed, you'll probably get enough combo action going that you can pick whatever floats your boat. I just kind of wonder what the deal is for the 'touched' business. It had better be some pretty awesome "subtle" effects if you're foregoing an entire extended subguild for it.
"nobody is going to roll merch/magickers except to be contradictory"
I firmly disagree with you.
Though this is with the assumption someone can convince staff to let the make a unique magic mc.
Also a merchant/magicker roll would be perfect for your standard 'priest' arch type.
Being completely shitty at everything but having heal spells!
Unless we were talking about strictly combat or some shit, then obviously merchant/anything isn't a good idea.
Quote from: Jihelu on August 11, 2016, 03:50:51 PM
"nobody is going to roll merch/magickers except to be contradictory"
I firmly disagree with you.
Though this is with the assumption someone can convince staff to let the make a unique magic mc.
Also a merchant/magicker roll would be perfect for your standard 'priest' arch type.
Being completely shitty at everything but having heal spells!
Unless we were talking about strictly combat or some shit, then obviously merchant/anything isn't a good idea.
Yes, I'm talking strictly about combat. It's almost pointless to talk about a guild/subguild metagame with respect to social interaction, beyond the listen skill.
Then I completely agree with you!
Other than a support roll/buff roll you are not a combat character at all.
I suppose you could twink defense, have three people guard you, and spam fireball during the fight but....thats still dangerous for you.
I did not notice this change I've been gone for so long
why staff why
I need to now drink my sorrows away
Quote from: Delirium on August 11, 2016, 09:40:55 AM
Good lord, if elementalists could gather they would be insanely more powerful in the long game. I have to vote no.
I didn't suggest that they *could* gather. I suggested that they MUST gather. As in - no gather = no mana = no cast. They could still have a max mana cap, but it'd be 0/100 or 0/114 or 0/[whatever their personal max cap is] if they weren't gathering.
As I said my idea is based on personal experience of this. I had an elementalist who HAD to gather, in order to cast. It was incredibly difficult, occasionally frustrating, and astoundingly fun.
.
Quote from: Molten Heart on August 11, 2016, 07:16:03 PM
I could be wrong but, aren't elementals who have to gather to get mana called sorcerers?
Are they CALLED sorcerers? Possibly, ICly. OOCly though, no. They're not the same thing. Elementalists are limited by the element as to which spells they can access. Sorcerers don't have that limitation.
Originally when I typed that sentence I added..'I think' to the OP part. Later I removed it after some thought. The reason is because in terms of offense, a magicker running in and casting/being prepared before you can do anything yourself is still an option regardless of whether you have stealth or not. However despite the fact you hear about a random magick attack now and then, i want to believe the majority of people do not play like that. And I want to believe the staff punishes people who do that without cause or reason.
Contrary to popular opinion, full mages were infinitely more powerful than the current guild/sub-guild combo, mages with extended sub-guilds even more so. They had a vast variety of both offensive and defensive spells, the current sub-guilds are vastly inferior in this regard, and I'm okay with that. However, this means if the magicker is just being a person that is minding their own business and someone begins to press on them, or attacks them, there will be no surprise twist to that story.
I do like low magick; I don't like sorcerer kings and I am glad full sorcerers are gone. I don't mind full mages are gone, but it was a change that surprised me too. Being a magicker already has drawbacks of isolation. You are either gemmed or rogue in most cases (some exceptions exist). If you are rogue and rely on magick everyone in the known will eventually know. Otherwise you are basically playing a sub-less guild which hurts almost any guild except ranger. Again, if you just want to use magick to gank and be an annoying twink, you can still manage to pull it off, it is no where near as amazing as before but possible. However if you want to just use your magick to survive bad encounters, you are out of luck.
Basically the reason I'm suggestion that the one restriction be removed is because I want magickers to be people first with the temptation to just rely on their their magick in 'Oh Shit' situations. Instead of magick in its current form which is more geared towards people that just want to have gud bufs n' backstab.
P.S My vote is still no to full sorcerers and even mages. Full sorcerers already seem to exist in the game for staff storytelling purposes, that is good enough.
Quote from: Lizzie on August 11, 2016, 07:26:00 PM
Quote from: Molten Heart on August 11, 2016, 07:16:03 PM
I could be wrong but, aren't elementals who have to gather to get mana called sorcerers?
Are they CALLED sorcerers? Possibly, ICly. OOCly though, no. They're not the same thing. Elementalists are limited by the element as to which spells they can access. Sorcerers don't have that limitation.
This is going to be very VERY possibly borderline.
Icly I've only heard of defilers/sorceres in general referred to as ashlayers.
I imagine if elementalists could gather from ONLY THEM SELVES it would be treated as just a 'weird magick thing' and not with as much scrutiny as a defiler.
Quote from: Jihelu on August 11, 2016, 08:01:05 PM
Quote from: Lizzie on August 11, 2016, 07:26:00 PM
Quote from: Molten Heart on August 11, 2016, 07:16:03 PM
I could be wrong but, aren't elementals who have to gather to get mana called sorcerers?
Are they CALLED sorcerers? Possibly, ICly. OOCly though, no. They're not the same thing. Elementalists are limited by the element as to which spells they can access. Sorcerers don't have that limitation.
This is going to be very VERY possibly borderline.
Icly I've only heard of defilers/sorceres in general referred to as ashlayers.
I imagine if elementalists could gather from ONLY THEM SELVES it would be treated as just a 'weird magick thing' and not with as much scrutiny as a defiler.
I stated as such in my idea; that elementalists were required to gather, and sorcerers would have an option to defile (implying that elementalists would -not- have that option).
The problem with that is I think gathering from anywhere will get Tektolnes on your ass in the city.
So a code change would need to happen.
You're going into a slightly IC territory there, I think. There's a significant aspect there that is not publicly known. Or am I wrong? Maybe it's in a helpfile.
Quote from: Dar on August 11, 2016, 11:52:34 PM
You're going into a slightly IC territory there, I think. There's a significant aspect there that is not publicly known. Or am I wrong? Maybe it's in a helpfile.
From the help file
The rulers of most centers of civilization make no distinction between
preservers and defilers, and sorcerers of any sort are strictly outlawed.
Gathering may alert the templars to a sorcerer's presence.
Quote from: Jihelu on August 12, 2016, 12:05:20 AM
Quote from: Dar on August 11, 2016, 11:52:34 PM
You're going into a slightly IC territory there, I think. There's a significant aspect there that is not publicly known. Or am I wrong? Maybe it's in a helpfile.
From the help file
The rulers of most centers of civilization make no distinction between
preservers and defilers, and sorcerers of any sort are strictly outlawed.
Gathering may alert the templars to a sorcerer's presence.
these helpfiles are bullshit. Way to spoil a SURPRISE!!!!!!!!!!
Quote from: Lizzie on August 11, 2016, 06:25:19 PM
Quote from: Delirium on August 11, 2016, 09:40:55 AM
Good lord, if elementalists could gather they would be insanely more powerful in the long game. I have to vote no.
I didn't suggest that they *could* gather. I suggested that they MUST gather. As in - no gather = no mana = no cast.
Yeah, no, I understood. And it would make them insanely powerful. No thanks.
Elementalists gathering is a stupid idea. Why are we even on this tangent?
Quote from: Jihelu on August 11, 2016, 11:38:01 PM
The problem with that is I think gathering from anywhere will get Tektolnes on your ass in the city.
So a code change would need to happen.
I'm suggesting that full elementalists would, by design, have to be rogues.
Get rid of gemmed entirely - close down the temples, have a riot and blast the elementalist quarter to rubble.
For "IC reasons" if an elementalist were needed by "IC info" to become "IC info," they could be enslaved (aka force-stored and become VNPCs) and cloistered in some virtual building in the templar's quarter.
Let Oash be the risk-takers who make use of rogues on the sly, using agents with clandestine meetings outside the city to acquire/produce/accomplish whatever it is the Oash noble needs to acquire/produce/accomplish. Might even make the Plantation more useful, if that was the only "safe" place that Oash could meet directly with an elementalist. And of course Oash would know that Elementalists are not sorcerers so in their own macabre crazy fantastical logical minds, they would be justified in doing so.
Quote from: Delirium on August 12, 2016, 01:14:45 AM
Quote from: Lizzie on August 11, 2016, 06:25:19 PM
Quote from: Delirium on August 11, 2016, 09:40:55 AM
Good lord, if elementalists could gather they would be insanely more powerful in the long game. I have to vote no.
I didn't suggest that they *could* gather. I suggested that they MUST gather. As in - no gather = no mana = no cast.
Yeah, no, I understood. And it would make them insanely powerful. No thanks.
I'm telling you from personal actual experience - that it doesn't make them insanely powerful. It LIMITS their power immensely. I was able to defile, and I tried for weeks to *not* do that. It was stupendously difficult, and I finally gave in. By the time the event occurred that ceased my character's natural mana regen and forced her to gather, she was already maxed out. But just surviving by preserving exclusively, without ready access to any spells outside her own element, was daunting.
I can't really argue with you without going into code specifics, so I'm just going to be glad that this will never happen.
Quote from: Delirium on August 12, 2016, 09:24:04 AM
I can't really argue with you without going into code specifics, so I'm just going to be glad that this will never happen.
And I'm trying to tell you - not even trying - flat out stating - it DID happen. With my PC. And I didn't become insanely overpowerful. I was already a maxed-out whiran, pre-nerf, and was NOT insanely overpowerful. I'll give you this: the fact that I was ultimately able to defile DID make the potential for insane overpowerfulness to occur. But prior to knowing I was able to defile - no, what you think would happen (whatever that thing is, I have no idea) - didn't happen.
Dude, I've played magickers and sorcerers too.
I think it's a terrible idea.
Sorry we don't agree.
Quote from: Lizzie on August 12, 2016, 12:58:49 PM
what you think would happen (whatever that thing is, I have no idea) - didn't happen.
snicker
Quote from: Raptor_Dan on August 12, 2016, 05:46:51 PM
Quote from: Lizzie on August 12, 2016, 12:58:49 PM
what you think would happen (whatever that thing is, I have no idea) - didn't happen.
snicker
I don't often agree or like lizzie's ideas, and there are times when her ideas feel borderline offensive. That said, this type of post isn't helpful to the conversation either.
I'll refrain from making jokes on the GDB. From now on, all of my posts will be helpful. Super helpful.
Quote from: Raptor_Dan on August 13, 2016, 02:04:05 PM
I'll refrain from making jokes on the GDB. From now on, all of my posts will be helpful. Super helpful.
At risk of this board becoming a hugbox, quoting someone and just responding snicker is a bit derisive
I thought I was pointing out how ludicrous (so unreasonable it's amusing) it was to say 'I have no idea what you expect, but it didn't happen. I'm not against Lizzie, I like a lot of her posts and ideas, that comment though, I thought was worthy of making fun of (i.e. derisive). I legitimately thought what I was doing was obvious, but I make this mistake a lot. I also don't know what you mean by 'at risk of this board becoming a hugbox,' perhaps because of the way it's phrased.
I'll make this short so I don't derail too much. Using jokes is a great way (for me, and historically, others) to point out logical fallacies and highlight unreasonable behavior, imho. I feel it keeps the person doing it from sounding like a zealous pedant. Maybe not.
Last post on this thread, until some idea or comment is presented that I can contribute something of respectable value towards. I don't want to burn out Raptor_Dan's already limited appeal.
Quote from: Raptor_Dan on August 14, 2016, 09:23:21 PM
I thought I was pointing out how ludicrous (so unreasonable it's amusing) it was to say 'I have no idea what you expect, but it didn't happen. I'm not against Lizzie, I like a lot of her posts and ideas, that comment though, I thought was worthy of making fun of (i.e. derisive). I legitimately thought what I was doing was obvious, but I make this mistake a lot. I also don't know what you mean by 'at risk of this board becoming a hugbox,' perhaps because of the way it's phrased.
I'll make this short so I don't derail too much. Using jokes is a great way (for me, and historically, others) to point out logical fallacies and highlight unreasonable behavior, imho. I feel it keeps the person doing it from sounding like a zealous pedant. Maybe not.
Last post on this thread, until some idea or comment is presented that I can contribute something of respectable value towards. I don't want to burn out Raptor_Dan's already limited appeal.
Actually I thought it was kinda funny. No offense taken Dan. After I posted it, and saw your little snicker, I thought - wow that really didn't come out so good afterall. I knew what I meant, I just didn't convey it. Basically - that Delirium was making assumptions about what -might- happen -if- elementalists had to gather their mana from themselves only, and couldn't just regenerate it over time. I was telling her there's nothing to assume, because it's already happened at least once, and there was no "overpowered" stuff going on as a result. It was a fairly long, drawn-out process, frustrating on an IC level but very rewarding from an OOC perspective because of the plotline that led up to and progressed from it. My PC ended up defiling afterall, but only after a period when she had to refrain, and then *I* the player didn't know that she could, and didn't think to try it for a couple of weeks. It's definitely not for anyone wanting the fast-track to power, especially if you can only gather self and not defile. So whatever Delirium thinks would happen to make them overpowered - didn't happen, because the overpowering thing didn't happen. On an already-maxed pre-nerf whiran.
Hugbox achieved. :D
Quote from: Lizzie on August 14, 2016, 10:15:31 PM
Quote from: Raptor_Dan on August 14, 2016, 09:23:21 PM
I thought I was pointing out how ludicrous (so unreasonable it's amusing) it was to say 'I have no idea what you expect, but it didn't happen. I'm not against Lizzie, I like a lot of her posts and ideas, that comment though, I thought was worthy of making fun of (i.e. derisive). I legitimately thought what I was doing was obvious, but I make this mistake a lot. I also don't know what you mean by 'at risk of this board becoming a hugbox,' perhaps because of the way it's phrased.
I'll make this short so I don't derail too much. Using jokes is a great way (for me, and historically, others) to point out logical fallacies and highlight unreasonable behavior, imho. I feel it keeps the person doing it from sounding like a zealous pedant. Maybe not.
Last post on this thread, until some idea or comment is presented that I can contribute something of respectable value towards. I don't want to burn out Raptor_Dan's already limited appeal.
Actually I thought it was kinda funny. No offense taken Dan. After I posted it, and saw your little snicker, I thought - wow that really didn't come out so good afterall. I knew what I meant, I just didn't convey it. Basically - that Delirium was making assumptions about what -might- happen -if- elementalists had to gather their mana from themselves only, and couldn't just regenerate it over time. I was telling her there's nothing to assume, because it's already happened at least once, and there was no "overpowered" stuff going on as a result. It was a fairly long, drawn-out process, frustrating on an IC level but very rewarding from an OOC perspective because of the plotline that led up to and progressed from it. My PC ended up defiling afterall, but only after a period when she had to refrain, and then *I* the player didn't know that she could, and didn't think to try it for a couple of weeks. It's definitely not for anyone wanting the fast-track to power, especially if you can only gather self and not defile. So whatever Delirium thinks would happen to make them overpowered - didn't happen, because the overpowering thing didn't happen. On an already-maxed pre-nerf whiran.
There's a difference between a rogue mage being forced to 'gather self' and a gemmed mage being forced to 'gather self.' It's relatively easy for gemmed mages to team up and create super-squads. Do you really want a gemmed warrior/devastation krathi dropping 4 mon area-effects in a matter of moments while his warrior/healing Vivaduan battle-buddy is acting as a mana battery?
Quote from: Synthesis on August 15, 2016, 02:56:41 AM
There's a difference between a rogue mage being forced to 'gather self' and a gemmed mage being forced to 'gather self.' It's relatively easy for gemmed mages to team up and create super-squads. Do you really want a gemmed warrior/devastation krathi dropping 4 mon area-effects in a matter of moments while his warrior/healing Vivaduan battle-buddy is acting as a mana battery?
I'll totes paly tank/heal for warlock aoe dps.
Can't wait to try it in next Armageddon raid.
Quote from: Synthesis on August 15, 2016, 02:56:41 AM
Quote from: Lizzie on August 14, 2016, 10:15:31 PM
Quote from: Raptor_Dan on August 14, 2016, 09:23:21 PM
I thought I was pointing out how ludicrous (so unreasonable it's amusing) it was to say 'I have no idea what you expect, but it didn't happen. I'm not against Lizzie, I like a lot of her posts and ideas, that comment though, I thought was worthy of making fun of (i.e. derisive). I legitimately thought what I was doing was obvious, but I make this mistake a lot. I also don't know what you mean by 'at risk of this board becoming a hugbox,' perhaps because of the way it's phrased.
I'll make this short so I don't derail too much. Using jokes is a great way (for me, and historically, others) to point out logical fallacies and highlight unreasonable behavior, imho. I feel it keeps the person doing it from sounding like a zealous pedant. Maybe not.
Last post on this thread, until some idea or comment is presented that I can contribute something of respectable value towards. I don't want to burn out Raptor_Dan's already limited appeal.
Actually I thought it was kinda funny. No offense taken Dan. After I posted it, and saw your little snicker, I thought - wow that really didn't come out so good afterall. I knew what I meant, I just didn't convey it. Basically - that Delirium was making assumptions about what -might- happen -if- elementalists had to gather their mana from themselves only, and couldn't just regenerate it over time. I was telling her there's nothing to assume, because it's already happened at least once, and there was no "overpowered" stuff going on as a result. It was a fairly long, drawn-out process, frustrating on an IC level but very rewarding from an OOC perspective because of the plotline that led up to and progressed from it. My PC ended up defiling afterall, but only after a period when she had to refrain, and then *I* the player didn't know that she could, and didn't think to try it for a couple of weeks. It's definitely not for anyone wanting the fast-track to power, especially if you can only gather self and not defile. So whatever Delirium thinks would happen to make them overpowered - didn't happen, because the overpowering thing didn't happen. On an already-maxed pre-nerf whiran.
There's a difference between a rogue mage being forced to 'gather self' and a gemmed mage being forced to 'gather self.' It's relatively easy for gemmed mages to team up and create super-squads. Do you really want a gemmed warrior/devastation krathi dropping 4 mon area-effects in a matter of moments while his warrior/healing Vivaduan battle-buddy is acting as a mana battery?
There would be no gemmed mages that gather, because gathering is STILL considered sorcery by the known world and therefore anyone caught doing it would be instagibbed by the soldiers. Gather + gem = bad.
Gemmed subguilds = yes.
Gemmed full mages = no.
(https://media.giphy.com/media/OOezqqxPB8aJ2/giphy.gif)
It may not have been overpowered in your hands, but believe me, it could be. Even if limited to spells of a specific element.
Having had a maxed preserver and near-maxed sorcerer, you're just going to have to trust me on that. ;)
The exception doesn't make the rule though. The fact not very many sorcs (preserver or the other kind) have been in the IC news (except maybe for 1 or 2 in the last 5 years) shows it's not terribly OP/abusable.
No, that just means most of them keep an extremely low profile due to the lack of socialization opportunities for the cautious and intelligent.
Being an "open" sorc requires a level of near-max unstoppability and/or lots of solid allies.
Giving elementalists the ability to gather to make them more powerful is thematically inconsistent and amounts to nothing more than "buff wizards." So, bad idea on 2 points.
Hey, so I am waaaaay late to the party on this thread, but I thought it was worth commenting on anyways. I read a fair amount of the posts, and just wanted to say that I totally agree with the following statement (I forget who said it and I apologize for not properly quoting it):
"No more glass cannons, now they are tanks, that fire MAGICK"
Yay! I am super looking forward to trying out these sub-guilds. I personally think it will be nice to see magickers that can also develop real-world skills like a normal person.
:)