Armageddon General Discussion Board

I've moved the bulk of this post from another thread, which began as a discussion on how mundane people should more appropriately demonstrate fear of the "magicker" with a few suggestions.  My response began with a quote from Pantoufle:

Quote from: "Pantoufle"I see more "issues" with the magicker population, itself, than with the "mundane" PCs who respond to magickers.

Firstly, there are simply way too many magickers in the game. I'm guilty of this, having played a long stream of spellcasting characters, myself, but the fact remains: there are just too many.

I agree completely. There is a notion in the documentation that magickers are this rare and mysterious breed capable of wielding immense power that warrants respect and fear. This fear is supposedly based on two things; that the general populace knows very little of them for lack of interaction/experience, and that magickers wield freakish levels of power.

As Pantoufle has mentioned, one of the problems is that they are not rare.

Were they ever rare? No. The problem is that IC events have completely changed the role of the magicker in the gameworld (in my opinion, for the worse) which has subsequently affected class development, world views, and this very discussion today. Here is how that happened:

Quote from: "Armageddon Documentation"A terrifying and presumably magickal cataclysm strikes the city-state of Tuluk, leaving it to be nothing more than a pile of rubble and ruins. Over seventy thousand people are killed that day in what has since come to be known as the Fall of Tuluk. During the chaos, Precentor Kul manages to overthrow Precentor Isar and gains control over what little remains.

Before the Cataclysm, magickers had a viable role in the southlands, middle, and northlands.  They weren't hunted down like dogs outside the city walls.  The weren't chased with torches and pitchforks or called abominations.  They had the opportunity to live as men and women using their skills to operate as a peaceful and productive, if potentially dangerous, part of society.  The only magickers that were hunted down and killed were sorcerers and raiding magickers, who were relatively rare because each city-state had a wealth of elementalists in their emply to help identify and deal with such magickal threats.

Enter the Cataclysm

Now magickers have been ousted from the northlands. Hated and feared, selecting anything other than a southern-based magicker now comes with a giant neon sign above their head that reads, "Dangerous critter, kill on sight." This began a horrible cycle of events, both IC and OOC:

:arrow: The Cataclysm teaches northerners that "magick is bad, mmkay?"  Norrthern players begin hunting magickers, killing them on sight.

:arrow: No longer able to enjoy relative peace while they gain enough proficiency to protect themselves from mundane threats, the elementalist guilds are reworked to be given more useful spells earlier and faster progression through the tree.

:arrow: Those players choosing to create northern magickers were now predators or prey, or both. They no longer had a peaceful role to assume within the northern city-state, but were forced instead of be "on the run" and acknowledge that an entire civilization would likely only ever consider them an abomination to be executed as soon as possible.

:arrow: Magickers are pushed out of Tuluk and forced to find locations in which they can survive and practice their craft. These places happen to be the very same places frequented by isolated desert elf and nomadic human tribes, forcing these players to interact with these new magickal threats that normally were not commonly found.

:arrow: Now we have every magicker (not just sorcerers and magickers choosing to raid) running around the northern wilderness trying desperately (or not so desperately) to survive. There are few mundane organizations with which they can interact because most of them consider magickers highly dangerous and will kill them on sight.

This IC event has forever changed the role of the magicker in game. Once a working part of society, in which they could add to the story in a multitude of peaceful and useful ways, they have become a glass cannon aimed squarely at anyone that invades the spaces they've invaded. Magicker numbers seem higher, not because they're more of them, but because the most common interaction is likely a great display of their power. Magickers who would have otherwise been content to create food, water, mounts, and aid a given Merchant House in their tasks are now forced to defend themselves with violent magick. Magick with which the average mundane character cannot compete.

This change in interaction has also changed some perceptions. Some mundane characters, espcially tribals, who used to only have to deal with a few rare magickal threats are now forced to deal with them almost daily. What used to be a rare and mysterious creature has now become a prevalent and dangerous predator to specific (but large) areas of the game.

The influx of these magickal beings fighting for survival causes other groups to engage and, eventually, kill them. Immortals then feel obligated to give magickers even more teeth so that people are appropriately "afraid" of them, but that only furthers the divide of power and makes the non-magickal player feel like an inconsequential and ineffective part of "Magickgeddon."

I know that I've felt this way ever since independant magickers had no viable role in the northlands. And I know others have too. There is no proposed solution, because IC events are IC events, but are there suggestions for a way to allow northern magickers a role other than predator/prey?  I think having so large a group of people considered "hated and dangerous" by so many greatly limits the potential not only of their characters, but of the game itself.

-LoD

Well, I can't really offer a solution, because I personally like the way magickers have to hide in the north..
But basically, I think northerners should be a lot more AFRAID of magickers, with less of an instinct to kill and more of an instinct to run.
Furthermore, I don't think magick is THAT common in the north--- and it's certainly not a daily occurence, as you have stated, LoD.

I always compare Allanak's army vs Tuluk's army to one having nuclear weapons vs the other still fighting with cavalry and cannons.

Sure, you tried building a nuclear facility once in your city and it blew up in your face, but your enemy is still building nuclear weapons ready to be used against you each time you enter a military conflict against it. Wouldn't you try to at least give it another go, calculated risk and all? Who cares if it blows up in your face again and creates casualties. As long as it doesn't hurt you and your entourage.

Am I making any sense?

Yes, you're making sense, Malken, and it's a good point..

But magickers blew up half the city.
That's pretty intense.


EDIT: Or a quarter of the city. Either way. That's a lot.

Aheh.. don't assume Tuluk doesn't have teeth.

If it isn't sheltering mages anymore.. I leave it to you to ponder how they're making up for the lack of "nuclear" power.

But do that on your own time, not in this thread.

As for LOD's post, for once I am in general agreement.  Conflict and harshness is nice, but the mage role requires someone to be willing to enter a very daunting, and sometimes stressful task of never being able to let their guard down, ever, if they want to survive.  Due to the balance and nature of 'power' in Armageddon, however, I don't think this is likely to change any time soon.  Magick IS power, and those with the power will fight to ensure that they are supreme and the others are kept down.  Propaganda against those wielding that power is one very efficient weapon to use in that fight.


The scruffy haired, slinky human wanders off, humming:

You remind me of the babe! - What babe?
The babe with the power! - What power?
The power of voodoo!  - Who do?
You do! - Do what?
You remind me of the babe!

Yeah, plus in Armageddon, you can shoot down a nuclear weapon with a cannon. Or maybe even a horse.

The whole Roleplaying Extreme Fear of magickers problem goes both ways. The main reason most of my characters arent as deathly affraid of magickers as they probably should be...Is because if they were I would spend all of my time roleplaying being scared.

There are just too many magickers at any given time in the game world. I play mainly just rangers and almost every time I go hunting I see two or three of them loping and floating about the desert...For playability reasons I cant rp being scared of them because if I did I would have to do the same RP scene three times every time I left the gates.

My favorite part is when they want to do the whole..."IR HIDDEN AND UBER POWERFUL, HEAR MY VOICE AND TREMBLE"...what they fail to realize is that you have already played out this scene 30 other times with the same character in the past RL month and basically all it draws from you now is a yawn and some ooc annoyance.

I agree the main reason is about having too many magickers in game.

I am in favour of some way of reducing the number of magickers. I can not think of any good solution really.. Maybe making all magickers accepted by special app.? I mean let's say there are three magicker IMMs, and give five magickers to each of them. Nothing more.. or so... or putting some kind of limit for active magicker PCs on Zalanthas.  :?

Quote from: "http://www.armageddon.org/intro/underTuluk.html"The general populace does not know what a magicker is and isn't capable of, and assumes the worst. Magickers are blamed for disease, bad luck, and any other negative occurence.

Who, in the Tuluki society, are the ones that are magicker literate?

It seems to me that EVERY single PC from the north (Tuluk) seems to know what a magicker is.

I definitely don't think magickers should be special apped.  I love playing a magicker.  And I feel I have that choice too.

I also don't think the way magickers branching has anything to do with the problem.  I'm not exactly sure what people are saying the problem is here?  That there are too many magickers?

Guess what, the desert is a dangerous place.  And if you are not in the city expect to see large bugs, dangerous beasts, wonders, and dangers - some of which include magickers.  The places outside the gates can't be policed all of the time, and if that means magickers running rampant, well that what is what it means.

As I understand it, spellcasters were "buffed up" so as to counter two things: 1) the the fact that many players aren't RPing being afraid of magick: with magickers suddenly able to do nastier things, players will hopefully be more inclined to truly be afraid.  And 2) they were too easily killed just for sheathing a sword in order to cast.  A man who can kill you alive with flames in the blink of an eye could also die in the blink of an eye, himself, by any warrior who knew how to take advantage of the mage's CODED (not necessarily realistic) weaknesses.  All of this would be fine and dandy if it weren't for the population problem.

Again, I wholly admit I've played an obscene amount of spellcasters.  Currently I'm not and I wish to shy away from them for a good long while.  Once Upon a Time I created an elementalist who was making a journey from Tuluk to Allanak.  On his way he encountered 4 PCs in the wilderness and I shit you not, they were all magickers.  Every single one was a magicker, none of them were affiliated (to my knowledge) with the other.  It was like this: North Road, first bend, there's a man standing there.  We talk, it turns out he's a magicker.  We finally part and I continue my journey.  Tablelands somewhere, I stop to slurp at some muddy water and along comes a d-elf who -- can you believe it -- is a magicker.  Then I near Luir's and stumble upon yet another magicker.  As I near Allanak, some time later, suddenly a magicker is attacking me!  Let's not forget that I was also a magicker.  Are you seeing a trend here?  Incidentally, during my character's trek, these were the ONLY people he encountered.  At all.

Now maybe it was just a strange cooincidence.  Maybe at the time there were only 5 magickers in existence and I just so happened to meet the only other 4 there were.  But I doubt it.  Granted, this was during offpeak hours and for offpeak players, magickers can, admittedly, make a good choice for playability reasons.  Maybe if the staff took a statistic to see how many magickers currently compare to non-magickers we'd find the number not as big as Mr. Pantoufle is supposing.  I'd sure love for that to be the case and to be proven wrong.  I really would.

So what is the solution?  This board has long ago agreed that putting a maximum on the number of a certain guild is not a good idea.  It's also not a good idea to make karma stricter.  Hell, let players play a magicker, just make it god awful difficult for them!  That way, only the truly sinister and vile (should-be-hated) magickers thrive.

Also, the game needs to provide a greater insentive for being a non-magicker than it does for being a magicker.  With the opportunity to zip around the world unseen at the blink of an eye, why would I ever want to play anything BUT a whiran!?!  "Mundane" guilds need their props; the name mundane, alone, is altogether uninviting.  The problem is there are a lot of spells which allow casters to do things non-spellcasters cannot but, realistically, they could.  For example, there is no code for me to drop a ladder down a climb-check room and walk it without need for the climb skill.  A whiran can do this, I cannot.  A fire mage can actually burn things with the code whereas I cannot, since there is no code to use a torch for burning/attacking with.  Only those who can cast blindness can make it so I can't see, there is no code to kick sand in your eyes or tie a blindfold around your face.  It seems like a vast overhaul but the idea here is that SOMEHOW "mundane" guilds should be more inviting to players than magick ones.

The worst part is that Zalanthas is SUPPOSED to be a world low in magick, but the playerbase misrepresents this, as LoD has pointed out.

I agree somewhat with what LoD has said, but a few points here:

:arrow:  Magicker players are forced to rely on magick skills.  Some of the spells back in the day were made to accompany specific skills, and if the mage did not happen to pick the "correct" subclass, they had a useless spell.  Some of these improvements and "teeth" have been corrections to spells to make them usable and practical, since a mage should be reliant on these powers; otherwise, why have them?

:arrow:  Tuluk had a history of magicker paranoia prior to its Cataclysm.  Although you could be a magicker in public, even then, the Tulukis were pushing magickers too far in a societal situation with the threat of lynching.  Eventually, a group of powerful mages pushed back.  Surprise, surprise, surprise.  I would like to add that this was an entirely pc-driven plot back in the day, and one that should serve as a reminder to everyone of the ability of the playerbase to alter the gameworld--it's not as stagnant as some players think.

:arrow:  The equation LoD provides, while I consider it exaggerated (I don't believe in the "daily basis"), there was a clan that helped lessen the number of magickers seen in the game that is no longer active.  I think the game could really benefit in its return, quite frankly.

:arrow:  Without going into too much detail, there are tribes and clans across the Known World.  Those groups are not killing magickers because they're magickers, they're killing intruders on their turf.  There is a big difference there.

I don't think the future of magickers is as bleak as everyone thinks.  I do, however, worry for the future of mundanes, since we're about due for another Cataclysm.  :twisted:

Quote from: "Pantoufle"Also, the game needs to provide a greater insentive for being a non-magicker than it does for being a magicker.  With the opportunity to zip around the world unseen at the blink of an eye, why would I ever want to play anything BUT a whiran!?!  "Mundane" guilds need their props; the name mundane, alone, is altogether uninviting.  The problem is there are a lot of spells which allow casters to do things non-spellcasters cannot but, realistically, they could.  For example, there is no code for me to drop a ladder down a climb-check room and walk it without need for the climb skill.  A whiran can do this, I cannot.  A fire mage can actually burn things with the code whereas I cannot, since there is no code to use a torch for burning/attacking with.  Only those who can cast blindness can make it so I can't see, there is no code to kick sand in your eyes or tie a blindfold around your face.  It seems like a vast overhaul but the idea here is that SOMEHOW "mundane" guilds should be more inviting to players than magick ones.

The worst part is that Zalanthas is SUPPOSED to be a world low in magick, but the playerbase misrepresents this, as LoD has pointed out.

I think you make some good points, but I really like playing mundane characters.  So do alot of people even though they have magicker karma.  This is a game, sometimes the playerbase is not going  to represent the rarity of magickers.  But also would most NPCs be traveling from Allanak to the Tablelands to Tuluk in ONE day?  No - they would not.  I'm not saying you did anything wrong, because the game allows you to get from point A to point B that fast because this IS a game.  We can't be taking RL days to get to places.  That's not feesable.  My point is this:  PCs do not always represent common place NPCs.  You may say magickers should have been rarer in the scenario because it's says in the docs they are rare.  But it also says in the docs that NPCs usually don't leave, and if they travel it takes days.  PCs don't accurately represent the docs entirely because we play the exceptions from NPCs.  Instead of blaming it on the fact that there are "to many magickers" I would just say accept that this is a game and that's how it is.  

It doesn't mean that because there are a good portion of PC magickers you should act any differently when encountering one, they are still a magicker.

I disagree with those that say there are too many magickers in game. It comes and goes like any other pc type. Also, the only times I've frequently run into magickers is when I was either: a) Playing one myself. or: b) Playing in the southlands. This seems just fine to me.

I currently like the way things are going with the magickers themselves. For the most part I am disgusted with the all-too-common: "I'm attacking the mage out of fear, that's how my pc expresses their fear of magick."

I think this should be far less common and the more common reaction should be: "MAGICK! Fuck, I'm not getting the skin peeled from my bones or my scrotum turned inside out! I'm outta here!" "When I get back to the city, I'll get a mob together and we'll come back and destroy the thing. I'm sure as fucked not going to risk my neck trying to do it ALONE." (Or let the city deal with the dangerous thing.)

Quote from: "Pantoufle"Now maybe it was just a strange cooincidence.  Maybe at the time there were only 5 magickers in existence and I just so happened to meet the only other 4 there were.  But I doubt it.  Granted, this was during offpeak hours and for offpeak players, magickers can, admittedly, make a good choice for playability reasons.  Maybe if the staff took a statistic to see how many magickers currently compare to non-magickers we'd find the number not as big as Mr. Pantoufle is supposing.  I'd sure love for that to be the case and to be proven wrong.  I really would.

The problem I have with this is not that you encountered 4 magickers, but rather that you encountered 4 -obvious- magickers.  Discretion people, discretion.

In regards to magickers, Morgenes already stated in recent months that the overall population of magickers was 1 in 10 logged in during peak.  If that is the status quo for affairs, then Pantoufle's incident is an isolated coincidence.

Quote from: "Intrepid"In regards to magickers, Morgenes already stated in recent months that the overall population of magickers was 1 in 10 logged in during peak.

It's not about NUMBERS, it's about DISTRIBUTION.

Quote from: "Bebop"Instead of blaming it on the fact that there are "to many magickers" I would just say accept that this is a game and that's how it is.  

The issue is that the game "changed" and not all of us are passive about that change being made.  While there was tension between magickal and non-magickal folk in Old Tuluk, they were tolerated and allowed to have lives, relationships, careers, social interaction, and homes.  The city-state's acceptence helped to control a lot of that potential power by providing an environment out of which non-violent and positive opportunities could arise.

It's like having an ant farm with 100 ants.  You may see an occasional ant outside of the farm, but for the most part they are content and living safely within the confines of the farm.  Away from your food.  Away from your clothes.  Away from your walls.  If someone says to you, "Do you have an ant problem?"  You'd problem tell them that you see them occasionally, but it's nothing you can't tolerate.

Then some idiot destroys the ant farm.  The number of ants hasn't increased.  It's exactly the same as it ever was, but DAMN if it doesn't seem like everywhere I look -- there's an ant somewhere I wasn't expecting to see it.  Crawling on my food.  Crawling on my clothes.  Crawling on my wall.

It's the same with magickers.  There weren't any more, or any less, of them in years past -- but they had a major environment completely removed which used to provide a place to congregate, practice, eat, sleep, breed, etc...  And now that the environment is gone, many people are left saying,

"HELL YES I GOT AN ANT PROBLEM!"

-LoD

Nusku did some number watching lately, and had a few observations.

When the player count went over 20, the magicker/psi population was typically around 20% of the PC population (anything less than 20 players is too small to sample).  With numbers averaging about 60 players online during prime time, that means 48 were "mundane" and 12 were some type of magicker/psi.

Another point to consider is that anytime a guild gets some loving, there is always a sudden increase in people playing them as the playerbase gets curious what is new, what was changed.  It's no secret that there's been a focus on the magick system over the past year or two, and so people are playing them more to see what's new and what's going on.  I know this is true because people have told me, "I'm going to play a Rukkian next so I can see what these new spells are".

Another point to consider is that as time moves forward there are more and more people with more and more karms.  The percentage of people with 2+ karma is higher today that what it was 5 years ago.  Because of that, you see a lot more magickers - but eventually the people who are just getting to play them will stop and go back to rangers.  Did you know that Nusku also noticed, in the numbers, that there was one point where we had 85% rangers?

I agree, there are a rather large amount of magickers lately (elementalists mostly), but with anything, I believe it's a cycle that will correct itself after a while.

Quote from: "Halaster"Nusku did some number watching lately, and had a few observations.

When the player count went over 20, the magicker/psi population was typically around 20% of the PC population (anything less than 20 players is too small to sample).  With numbers averaging about 60 players online during prime time, that means 48 were "mundane" and 12 were some type of magicker/psi.

It would be interesting to link distribution with the numbers.  Are those 12 divided evenly (i.e. 4 in Allanak, 4 in Tablelands, 4 in Grasslands).  The point of my post was not about the number or ration of magickers to mundane characters, but the density of magickers to mundanes in certain areas of the north.

Encountering four magickers in Allanak is a drop in the bucket compared to the population numbers of the city-state, whereas four magickers running around the tablelands is a much denser distribution.  I'd be interested in how those numbers played out.

-LoD

As  somone who loves magickers and often plays them, i think it would be great to remove them all (except sorcerers) from the game and leave the sorcs as special app.

This would be good because the world would be as gritty and low-fantasy as it can get - and you would crap your pants when you met a magicker.

Quote from: "Halaster"I agree, there are a rather large amount of magickers lately (elementalists mostly), but with anything, I believe it's a cycle that will correct itself after a while.

*chuckle*
Like the too many half-elves, too many d-elves, and too many ranger cycles.

Quote from: "LoD"

It would be interesting to link distribution with the numbers.  Are those 12 divided evenly (i.e. 4 in Allanak, 4 in Tablelands, 4 in Grasslands).
-LoD

I can't really say because that'd actually give some things away, but, no, it is not evenly distributed.  Some areas have larger amounts than others.

Quote from: "moab"As  somone who loves magickers and often plays them, i think it would be great to remove them all (except sorcerers) from the game and leave the sorcs as special app.

This would be good because the world would be as gritty and low-fantasy as it can get - and you would crap your pants when you met a magicker.

I hope this never happens.

Quote from: "Intrepid"

Quote from: "moab"As  somone who loves magickers and often plays them, i think it would be great to remove them all (except sorcerers) from the game and leave the sorcs as special app.

This would be good because the world would be as gritty and low-fantasy as it can get - and you would crap your pants when you met a magicker.

I hope this never happens.

Agreed. It took me a long time before I tried it and enjoyed the role. Now, I am confident I can create on that I will enjoy playing. I still try to keep it spread out a little bit though.

Quote from: "Intrepid"

Quote from: "moab"As  somone who loves magickers and often plays them, i think it would be great to remove them all (except sorcerers) from the game and leave the sorcs as special app.

This would be good because the world would be as gritty and low-fantasy as it can get - and you would crap your pants when you met a magicker.

I hope this never happens.

I hope it never happens, too.
I'd hate to never get a chance to play a magicker.

I should expand on this.  I've never liked sorcerors.  It always felt like powergaming to me, and so I've never made one.  That said, I will probably create a sorc one of these days so I have some firsthand opinions to go off of, but elementalists have a theme.  Sorcs are all about power.  With an elementalist, the power has a purpose, but with a sorc, you have everything (or almost everything) with seemingly no rhyme nor reason as to why.

I understand the theme needing wizards, but I'd rather see them have a different set of spells and even a whole new spelltree than the elementalists--even if said spelltree was far more powerful.

I realize that they use the same words of power, but I see elementalists and sorcerors are being different entities entirely.

How can you say that sorcerers have no theme?  The theme behind sorcerers it the theme behind the entire world.  It is why the world was corrupted and why it's the desert wasteland it is.  Defilers drained the planet of life, stealing power from it to fulfill their own wills.  If anything, sorcerers are the most thematically strong classes in the game.

And who says that the sorcerer spell tree is the same, or isn't the same as any elementalist spell tree?  And no, we don't want you chiming in here to confirm or deny this rumor!

I agree that there are too many magickers and, more importantly, magickal events around. Like someone else said, eventually you stop wanting to roleplay out the super omg fear of magick because your character would be doing nothing but hiding and crying. It does get to the point of OOC annoyance to see magickers about constantly, especially in the wild, and sit there and ooh and aah about the same tricks you've seen a dozen times with this one PC. I don't think karma should go away when you app or that magickers should be solely special apped sorcerers, but I certainly think that playing a long stream of magicker PCs is in poor taste. Even secret magickers, being discreet with them is all well and good, but that only solves the problem for a short while. If three or four people your PC has known pretty well turn out to be secret magickers within their lifetime, that's not very rare or mysterious. It gets more to the point of "Oh, he has sweaty palms. I sure hope he's not another secret magicker."

I think part of the problem is with those of us playing the mundanes, too, however. Sure, attacking magickers on sight is a problem of its own, but we also can't expect everyone to run back to town and emote pissing their pants every time they see a magicker, since that may be more than once within an IG week. I'm more referring to the amount of knowledge that non-magickers express. I think we've all seen exchanges where someone will say they were assaulted by a magicker. What kind? Well, they were invisible, so it must have been a Whiran! (This is just an example. No need for responses about how things other than Whirans can go unseen) Well, I didn't feel any water or earthquakes or anything, so it must have been a sorcerer! If they're sitting, they can't do anything to you! How do these PCs know these things? Why doesn't anyone lift any eyebrow when someone expresses this knowledge?
And it all circles around again. Because someone's past 5 PCs have dealt with magick on a daily basis, some of them have fought giant mystical creatures within their hometown, and couple of them have seen super magickal rituals and such, they begin to assume that you would have to be stupid or sheltered not to know a few basic things about magickers. If everyone single PC I have ever played has seen Vivs seal gaping wounds, it's not unexpected that I will begin to think that everyone should know this.

I don't really have a solution to the problem at this point. Mostly, I just wanted to point out the perpetuating cycle. I don't really think magicker players, mundane players, the staff, or anything else is at fault, but I do certainly think it has a negative effect on keeping the setting consistant with the docs.

All the arguments against killing off the magicker classes revolve around "then I never  get to play one."  I think this argument is, while understandable, a bit shallow.

The topic comes up as part of the "magickers are too common" thread.

If they are too common, and I feel they are, we should remove a lot of them.

I for one would give up the chance to ever play another magicker if it meant the game would go that direction.

Further, you could always special app a sorc or something - so you would still get your chance to play a magicker.

So the idea that "you could never play one" is wrong. You could. It migh take awhile to finally get your app approved, but you would have your chance.

I'm even in favor of limiting sorc and magicker apps to one per player every six or twelve months.  What the hell?  What do we really loose? Not much.  And we stand to gain a whole lot of fear around the magicker classes and a lot more focus on the rough and tumble world of the mundane.

Quote from: "Morgenes"How can you say that sorcerers have no theme?  The theme behind sorcerers it the theme behind the entire world.  It is why the world was corrupted and why it's the desert wasteland it is.  Defilers drained the planet of life, stealing power from it to fulfill their own wills.  If anything, sorcerers are the most thematically strong classes in the game.

And who says that the sorcerer spell tree is the same, or isn't the same as any elementalist spell tree?  And no, we don't want you chiming in here to confirm or deny this rumor!

That's not actually what I'm referring to.  I'm well aware of the power source of the defilers and preservers, and I never stated that the class itself is invalid.

Quote from: "moab"All the arguments against killing off the magicker classes revolve around "then I never  get to play one."  I think this argument is, while understandable, a bit shallow.

Actually, my argument is, "I don't think moab should dictate my rp experience."  It's like someone not wanting certain options to prompt, even though other players would use them.  I don't think the playerbase as a whole should deprived due to a single player's frustrations on a single aspect of play.

Quote from: "moab"As  somone who loves magickers and often plays them, i think it would be great to remove them all (except sorcerers) from the game and leave the sorcs as special app.

This would be good because the world would be as gritty and low-fantasy as it can get - and you would crap your pants when you met a magicker.

You just said my thoughts loud.  I wish all the magicker classes were special app only.

I love being a noob and knowing nothing about magickers. I imagine it's somewhat refreshing for the people I RP with too, because I'm always like, "WHAT, you're KIDDING ME, they can do THAT?!" And then I faint.

Since I'm not really interested in magickers in general--I've never enjoyed casting classes in other games, I prefer to whack things with swords--I'm not sure if I'd play one if I even had the option. Then I would also lose my sweet noobiness about them. From my perspective, I would be fine with magickers being always special apped, or minimally the population controlled in some way such as limiting those with karma to 1 magicker per every X RL months.

Although, I have to say, my character has met a lot of other characters and to her knowledge only one so far has been a magicker--the rest of them all seem to have normal day jobs.

I do think it's really valid if your current character has encountered magickers over and over for them to build up some knowledge and lose some fear about magick. And I also think with so much interaction between mundane and magickal all the time, there's logically going to be a lot more leakage of knowledge of what magickers can and can't do into the general populace. The docs don't reflect this, but the docs rest on the assumption that magick is a lot more rare than it actually ends up being. When there are gemmers hanging out at the Bard's Barrel with the regular folk and making friends, maintaining a level of superstition about magick is going to be hard. Zalanthas is a world of oral tradition by necessity, so it makes sense that when Amos learns something interesting about magickers, it's going to get passed around a lot--sometimes distorted, and sometimes not.

I've got little to add right now, bud I'd like to say this is an important discussion that deals with one of my only major complaints about Armageddon.

I hate seeing magickers on every corner, gemmed or un-gemmed. It completely ruins the mystique that magick used to hold for me. Instead of feeling that thrill of fear and excitement, I usually feel a pang of disgust. Maybe that's a personal problem, but I would love to see magicker classes of all sorts made far less common.

-WP

Hi guys.  I am currently playing what is essentially my first magicker.  I waited a good while after picking up the karma because I had always said there were too many magickers, and I didn't want to be part of that problem, even though I -really- wanted to play one.

I certainly wouldn't be opposed to any reasonable system of limitations, such as 1 magicker every X months or whatever, but I think the most important factor is self-restraint.  Don't go nuts apping magickers just because you can.  Some people do this and then all but brag on the GDB about it.  If I had my way, trusting a player to not repeatedly app magickers would be a very big part of the "trust" that karma represents.

But anyway, playing a magicker has changed my mind somewhat.  I think they are an important part of the game world, and limiting their numbers too much would limit magicker-to-magicker roleplay.  If the Elementalist Quarter is barren, the gemmers will congregate in the commons.  I know what you're saying: they already do.  Well, yes and no.  I sure stay in the Elementalist Quarter 99% of the time, for a variety of IC reasons.  Also, as a gemmer I met a char who had probably been alive for a significant period of time while a past character, very prominent in the city, was alive.  This prominent character had -never- seen the mage in question, which leads me to believe that he also did a good job staying in his place.  

I don't care if this means I spend a lot of time solo-RPing or idling waiting for someone else to log in in the temple.  I apped a magicker because I wanted magicker RP, not tavern chitchat BS.  I'm not going to break char just for some oh-so-precious "interaction" with Aide #17 or Dusty Miner #82.  (Not knocking either of those roles: Dusty Miner in particular is always a favorite of mine, either to play or interact with.)

That's what I think is most important, at least as far as the situation in Allanak is concerned: segregation.    The number of magickers could be 50/50, and as long as everyone stays where they belong most of the time, everything is peachy.

And yeah, guys, for 99% of all commoner chars, I think it's best to roleplay more or less complete ignorance about magick until your character has actual in-game experience with it.  Most characters should -NOT- know the things they almost always seem to know about magickers.

A guild, like the Guild, that is an underground council of magickers.  Located actually underground far to the east.  :D

I really wonder if those of you who see magickers everywhere you go see them because you, the player, know what to look for and therefore what your character sees is coloured by your own OOC knowledge.

Myself, I have yet to play a magicker and have very little knowledge of the magic system. I don't know what spells there are, don't know what magic can or can't do.  What little knowledge I do have in this area has usually come from reading about it here on the GBD.  In two years of playing, I have seen instances of magic use maybe 10 times?  And all but 2 of those 10 times were with one character, one of my very first, who spent time with a Vivaduan.

I had a ranger with about 12 days of play time who roamed the grasslands a whole lot and who only once (at least to her knowledge or mine) encountered a magicker.  That particular time was with a sorceror and though it wasn't quite face to face, it was pretty unmistakable as the evidence of magic was extremely tangible.  She very likely did encounter other magickers in her travels but just never knew.  Though she was pretty dumb and naive, I don't think her lack of awareness of magick would be that much greater than the average Tuluki. I mean, why would most have a clue about it?

I guess I have a different definition of low fantasy than a lot of you.  Low fantasy as a term is aspect oriented; its definition changes dependent on what aspects of high fantasy are being contrasted.  I view Armageddon as low fantasy in that a lot of the action is day to day and gritty, rather than epic quests.  

However, I view the world as having a high degree of magick, rather than a low degree.  World devastated by magick, check.  Two out of three cities known to exist completely wiped out by magick, one of them having been partially destroyed by magick once before, check.  Templarate of both cities having (until recently) access to magick, check.  Entire quarter of one city devoted to those who can magick, check.  Various badass beings, from the Dragon to lesser known but existant ones involved with magick, check.  Sorcerer kings, check.  Entire armies having been wiped out with magick, check.  Undead, check.

So, low fantasy?  Yes.  Low magick?  No.  Now, what I love about Armageddon, is that generally the magick in it is more about low fantasy than it is about high fantasy.  Magick is rarely used to perform some miraculous quest to save the princess.  Its used to feed yourself, or get yourself water.  Its used to kill other people, rarely for noble reasons, rarely for truly evil reasons.  Magick within Armageddon is used lots of times for gritty reasons that would fall solidly in low fantasy.

So don't say Armageddon is low fantasy and thus should be low magick.

I'm going to have to go with Medena.. I recently played a 50+ days hunter-type character, in the north, that character went everywhere from the grasslands all the way to the tablelands, on almost a daily basis, and in -all- of my playtime, I have never encountered a magicker, at least not an open, hostile one..

It was to the point where I was complaining that I didn't feel like I was playing 'Armageddon' to some of my friends because I didn't see muls, didn't see magickers, didn't see sorcerers, and that's probably the way it should be.. I sure did hear a lot about them on the tavern boards, but my character never met one face to face in my many many months played with that character. And that was -very- recently.. So I don't know where all these sudden magickers are all popping out from, but now I really feel somewhat stupid that I never noticed any before ;)

Being one of the "mundane" I guess my perspective is if you refer to the non-magic wielding roles as mundane then you are really making more people want to play magickers. Everyone wants to be special (heck, I would settle for merely average just to bring me up from where I have been). So every player wanting to be special leads many to want to play magickers. Maybe we can just call us normal people, non-magic types, so there isnt the inherent stigma of being less of a character because we dont have any karma built up? Calling someone mundane really has a bit of mean side to it.

Oh and to be clear, I have played a slave before and it is my favorite role to date.

When I talk to the Imms about my character or anything else they usually say something like "Wow, you have really shitty stats!". Yet that is what happens all the time and yet I have fun here and there and that isnt a problem. How many of you can boast of having a poor, below average, and averge, and good? I relish in my humanity :)

Actually, mundane doesn't refer to a player, Vynestra--it refers to a character.  It's easier for me to type out "mundane" then it is for me to type out "non-magical", and I use the term mundane to refer to my own pcs who are not mages as well.

It's not an insult in the slightest.  You're reading into it.

Yeah, "mundane" is synonimous with "non-magical" in terms of fantasy RPGs.

Heh heh... muggles.

I like the idea of one magicker per X RL months.
It would definetly help this problem.
It would also make people pay more attention to their magicker characters, flehsing them out and making them deeper and making them people first, magickers second... because they'd only get a limited amount of mages.
I also like the idea of magickers only allowed through special apps.
But at the same time... I like seeing magickers, and I really don't think there are THAT many... but then again, I'm just a noob, so what do I know? 8)

A thought...

Why do we see so many magickers in the wilderness?  (And I don't, personally...)

Because warriors, rangers, assassins, and merchants often join clans, effectively pulling them out of the wilderness.  Shady classes tend to stick to cities.

So who else are you going to run into in the wilderness, especially away from roads?  The other outcasts...

Morrolan

With the whole HRPT thing (war) going down, Allanak is being exposed to the magicker population and surprisingly enough, -most- of the people I've seen roleplay a fear or unwillingness, even though it's blatantly in their face, they don't understand it, how long it will last, is this permanent? Can I still make babies, etc...

As far as reactions go.. I haven't really seen anybody like.. sweet, teach me how? or.. do that again!

I've seen some surprised looks and sceptical assumptions, but nothing over the top.. everyone is playing the general consensus of fear.. IMHO.

I only read the first couple of monstrous posts on here, so some of this may have been stated already.

I have a mixed mind on this. I do think that the power and yet the amount of magickers needs to be limited, or else the game would be a bit more...twinkish I'll say.

Yet, there is so much put into the magick system, code wise and in other ways, that it's a shame all the players cannot experience it. (I've gotten on the bad side of more than a few people In-game so I don't have much karma to play a magicker first-hand)

But I think so far, the magickers in-game have done a good job not abusing their power. There's a few things I think they should stop doing, though, because I am tired of whiran attacks where you hit them until they are near-death and they run after killing a bunch of your party. That I think is BS, when it is done over and over again.

But I like the position magickers are in. Oash, for example, provides a haven for some. You can freely live in allanak, and practice your skills, as long as your not a defiler. Don't go to Tuluk, there is some creepy shit going on there.

I'm not going to give anything away, but don't be a fooled into thinking there is no magick in Tuluk because the templaret kills any -abominations- they find. There is alot of hypocracy behind that. (By the way, jstorrie, I am not necessarily refering to them doing anything with magickers)

SO, I can understand what you are saying, LoD, and I guess it simply comes down to the playerbase to change it.

That is giving things away, or would be if it was true (which it might or might not be.)

The northern templarate are not fools, but what they may or may not be doing with magickers in the north is not appropriate for public discussion in an IC or OOC sense.

Quote from: "Intrepid"
Actually, my argument is, "I don't think moab should dictate my rp experience."  It's like someone not wanting certain options to prompt, even though other players would use them.  I don't think the playerbase as a whole should deprived due to a single player's frustrations on a single aspect of play.

How can this be your argument?

I didn't start the thread - the thread comes up again and again and many people complain about the magicker problem.

I'm just giving you what I believe is the best solution for the mud.  Further, you have your RP dictated all the time by the whim of people you don't even know - the staff, so is it just me you have a problem with?  If so - there's no argument worth our time here.  If you have some reason why this isn't a good solution, I would like to hear it.

Quote from: "moab"

Quote from: "Intrepid"
Actually, my argument is, "I don't think moab should dictate my rp experience."  It's like someone not wanting certain options to prompt, even though other players would use them.  I don't think the playerbase as a whole should deprived due to a single player's frustrations on a single aspect of play.

How can this be your argument?

I didn't start the thread - the thread comes up again and again and many people complain about the magicker problem.

I'm just giving you what I believe is the best solution for the mud.  Further, you have your RP dictated all the time by the whim of people you don't even know - the staff, so is it just me you have a problem with?  If so - there's no argument worth our time here.  If you have some reason why this isn't a good solution, I would like to hear it.

Because there -isn't- really a problem to begin with. There isn't any need for a solution to a problem that doesn't exist.

Damn, you, jhunter!

;-)

Quote from: "jhunter"Because there -isn't- really a problem to begin with. There isn't any need for a solution to a problem that doesn't exist.

I hate it when people make a post of a quote and don't add anything themselves sooo...

Right on, brother!

As for the overpopulation problem, I don't think the solution is to set a maximum number of allowed magickers in the game. I'm not a big fan of restrictions like that, but if I had to come up with something, I'd suggest not allowing people to play magickers over and over and over. It's my impression that some players play only magickers, and I think it would be reasonable to say that you can't play a magicker twice or three times in a row. Or, say, only three magickers per six characters. Something like that. Noone wants to not be allowed to play the character they want because someone else is hogging their spot in the Cool Kids Club. I've never played a magicker, but when I get the karma I'll probably try, just to see what it's like. But it wouldn't feel right to me to play five Rukkians in a row.

Quote from: "Hymwen"But it wouldn't feel right to me to play five Rukkians in a row.

I feel the same way.  As much as I love playing magickers, I do take off every other character on average so that someone being considered for a special app magicker can get a chance.

I posted general agreement with the first post on the thread it was first posted on.

Now, I could jump in and talk away here, but I think the first step is to work out what sort of game we want to be playing. Some of us would be quite happy in a magicker iso-clan. Some of us would be much happier if no magicker clans, iso or not, existed. We all differ. So, here's what I'd picture as my ideal Arm:

1) A gritty Zalanthas. The silk clad aides of Noble Houses, the servants and the guards and the nobles - none of these things ever properly felt like Arm to me. Playing at comfortable living in a large, static House led to the feel of Zalanthas being lost. The struggle was gone.

The Byn feels real, still, and the dirty 'Rinthers, and even the more successful hunters and crafters making a living and trying to build small groups up round them. The Zalanthas I'd like to see would feature few PCs in silk, and most of the organisations (not Houses, small-time merchants of below Byn-size) responsible for providing food and water for their members, not having it available automatically. It would be a struggle to survive, sometimes. And there would be lots of small-scale political RP; as Rindan said many moons ago, if we closed every part of Arm but the 'Rinth, and crammed everyone in there with no coded affiliations, intrigue would skyrocket.

2) A laissez-faire attitude to "less harmful" magickers. Back when our ancestors were burning witches, there were no shortage of people who went to those supposed witches to ask for love potions, for cures for disease, for blessings on them and their families and curses on those they hated. I picture in my mind a teeming slum in a city where the inhabitants know that the old, odd, blind man at the top of the most run-down of the tenements is a Vivaduan; but they don't sell him out to the templars, because firstly, it's none of their business that he's breaking the law, and secondly, their hard life would be even harder without the water and healing he can provide. They rationalise that he's not really a dangerous magicker, and an uneasy co-existence is maintained because they don't know what he might do to them if he finds them betraying him, and he can't afford to push them too far in case they do. And perhaps the templars know of him anyway, but aren't disposed to act as long as he's discreet in his law-breaking - after all, templars are busy people.

It's been many an IC year since Tuluk was destroyed, and there's been many a victim of starvation and thirst in the slums of Tuluk since. Magickers capable of alleviating such problems may well have made themselves niches here and there. Of course, the less a magicker can do to help others, the more likely it is that someone will snitch. It's never going to be wise to announce that you're a Nilazi.

To revisit 1), the reason this doesn't make perfect sense at the moment is that much of the playerbase resides in clans who give them food and water for free, and who feel it their duty to report "troublemakers" to the templarate. Your magicker's clients are likely to be VNPC only.

I would like magick to be rare though, or at least discreet. I want it to have mystique. I think it's more discreet at present than some give it credit for. Getting a group of three or four secret magickers together should feel like a major achievement. I don't personally like "gemmed" magickers all that much, but as long as they keep their casting to their temples, I think the mystique can be well preserved. I don't like the idea of sizeable magicker clans, particularly iso-clans.

(Also, looking back at this, it seems to me as though a lot of what I personally am looking for could be created if we had enough PCs getting together and forming independent clans in Red Storm with an intelligent attitude to magick.)

I dislike this kind of posts.. Why?

"People shouldn't play magickers.".. Why? I love playing magickers. I confess, I play elementalists again again except breaks given with merchants and rangers. Why? I love magickers. I love to play magickers. One of my last recent notes in my account is: "Good job with <magicker name>. Can handle all mages.". I'm known amongst staff as a good magicker player, I make in-depth, plot-forming, deceitful magickers and I try to make the game joyful for both me and players around me.

"Magickers are too many.".. So what? What does staff say when we want a ground-breaking event? "Do it IC!". We, magicker lovers are making the world more magickal IC. We're not dying, we're not revealing our identities till we grow in power, we're forming our own plots, allying against sorcerer kings, allying to live freely against dangers.. We're seeking treasures, making treasures, helping our little trade with a little bit of magick and remaining unknown. We, as gemmers, are being a good tool in the hands of the templerate and living in luxury in exchange. We are doing many things all of which are IC and then someone comes and says: "Magickers are too many.". So what? It's the players' choice. Noone forces me to play more and more elementalists. I myself choose to play more of them. If we're making a low-magick game high-magick - Arm? Low magick? Hehe... - it's the usual turn of events. It's the choice of some players and the staff does not want to chime in. So what's there to talk?

We, as some magick-loving players, decided this era of Arm is the era of elementalism, when the rifts of the elements opened further and caused an increase in the elementalist population. It'll pass when everyone but true magicker-lovers like me decide to shift back to mundane. Wait for the end of the era.

Quote from: "Twilight"I guess I have a different definition of low fantasy than a lot of you.
(snip)
low fantasy?  Yes.  Low magick?  No.
(snip)
So don't say Armageddon is low fantasy and thus should be low magick.

Twilight said what I would say, so I'll just say that these are the important parts of that post to take with you in my opinion.

You see magickers in the wilderness because there is not a Templarate/Army to police or moderate their effect on the game world. The most challenge a magicker is going to see is from another wandering magicker or maybe a few tribals that live in the area (unlikely).

They tend to dominate these areas in the same way that they're able to typically dominate a PC without magick and they do so with very little threat from a 'gritty' Zalanthas world.

Really, I'd like to see the distribution of magickers even out again or for the Wilderness to grow more barbs, rather than the magicker PC's. There's tribes out there in the hundreds that are likely fairly tired of being given orders or having their tribesmen slain by every passing, overzealous magicker.

It'd be nice to see mundane-to-mundane roleplay again too, since my PC could actually participate in it. Until then, I'm patient.. I can deal.

Hot Dancer

Quote from: "Cenghiz"We, as some magick-loving players, decided this era of Arm is the era of elementalism, when the rifts of the elements opened further and caused an increase in the elementalist population. It'll pass when everyone but true magicker-lovers like me decide to shift back to mundane. Wait for the end of the era.

Cenghiz: this isn't a "do it IC!" situation. This isn't you changing the game world through RP, any more than it would be if you only made half-elves - half-elves don't mystically become ICly any more common just because players make them more frequently than some other races. All that's happening is that you're further skewing the balance of the PC population out of line with the Zalanthan one.

I'm not professing to be innocent myself. I've played 25 characters to their end, and 5 of those were magickers, which is proportionally about the same as the total PC population; but those 5 came in my last 12 characters, and in terms of playing time spent on them greatly exceed the mundanes. I used to justify this to myself on the basis that well, I hadn't played that magicker guild before and I'd played a (short-lived) mundane inbetween, and in any case there were plenty of other people playing non-magickers... and in doing so, I became part of the problem.

I love playing magickers, too. There are still guilds I haven't played I'd really like to tinker round with. I can even claim to be discreet, to rarely give myself away to PCs who I'm not certain are magickers also.

But the problem is this: magickers simply aren't that common IC.  This is reflected in Tuluk the city itself, where it's possible to go a long time without knowingly meeting a magicker. But if they start to become common sights in the wilderness, or even take up half the seats at the bar in the Barrel, then the game still suffers as a result. Do you enjoy the mystique of the magicker, the lure of the forbidden? That's what's in peril, here.

I too think part of the trustworthiness equation that's implicit in you getting karma is that you won't abuse it; you've now got the ability to make characters with a coded advantage, but if you're trustworthy you shouldn't be using it all the time. It's a question of taking responsibility.

I have no problem with there being alot of magickers...i have a problem with those magickers that are busting into taverns full of drunk and spiced people every other day and then complaining people are attacking them is bad RP (in the wilderness 80%+ of the people will flee regardless i'd say).

I'm mean if you want that kind of utter fear from everyone all the time play a templar otherwise magickers are uber enough that not attacking a magicker due to fear is more of an ic/ooc warning rather then an RP suggestion.

Quote from: "Cenghiz""People shouldn't play magickers.".. Why? I love playing magickers.

I don't want you to stop playing magickers.  My entire post was not about whether there were too many magickers, but that magickers are too densely distributed in the northland wilds due to the Cataclysm and will soon need a non-violent way to interact with northern society.  If there are 5 magicker players in Allanak, it's easily tolerable because you have tens of mundane PC's, hundreds of mundane NPC's and tens of thousands of mundane VNPC's balancing the population.

5 magicker players in the Tablelands makes it seem like there are crap tons of them running willy nilly all over the place.  How can a tribe of 5-6  compete in the same space with 5-6 magickers?  Especially if they're supposed to RP being afraid of them under penalty of more buffs to the elementalist guild?  I'd prefer to see "rogue magickers" as uncommon in the wilderness as escaped muls.  Magick should be rare in the first place, and even moreso in hostile environments.

Quote from: "Cenghiz""Magickers are too many.".. So what? What does staff say when we want a ground-breaking event? "Do it IC!".

There was a point years ago when escaped muls were a problem.  You saw them almost everywhere you looked, and they were unbalancing the game because of the raw power potential of the race.  It also went against their normal documentation for so many to be escaped, when really the percentage of them would be much smaller.  Was this taken care of by some major IC event?  No.  The karma setting for muls was moved higher than the bulk of these players who kept making them over and over and over again couldn't access them any longer.

Making escaped muls over and over and over was not appropriate for the game, just as making rogue magicker after rogue magicker shouldn't really be appropriate.  You're skewing the numbers and balance of the game according to the documentation.  It's what you like to play?  Sure, I'd like to sit in a room for a couple months and become a miniature god amongst men too every single character, but that's not a realistic choice for me.

Quote from: "Cenghiz""Magickers are too many.". So what? It's the players' choice. Noone forces me to play more and more elementalists. I myself choose to play more of them.

My post was aimed at hearing suggestions for how magickers in the northern wilds could again find a viable, non-violent way to interact with society.  I had no problems with the number of magickers when they were part of a working civilization in Old Tuluk, but players aren't taking responsibility to view the situation appropriately.  For there to be just as many magickers played now (or more) when they are hated, hunted, and destroyed on sight in the north as when they were accepted, tolerated, and part of the Old Tuluk society is highly unlikely.

Their numbers should reflect the relative difficulty their kind would have surviving in the wilds.  When people continue to roll them, it ignores some of these intangibles and creates an unbalance of power.  While I don't think a cap on the total numbers of magickers in game is necessary, I do think restricting how many of them are played outside of civilizations that tolerate them would help.

-LoD

QuoteI'd prefer to see "rogue magickers" as uncommon in the wilderness as escaped muls. Magick should be rare in the first place, and even moreso in hostile environments.

I couldn't disagree more. I think this is going way too far to one extreme. I don't know where you all are playing but unless I was personally playing a magicker or playing in Allanak, I haven't run into that many with my own pcs. Also, with all the gemmed in Allanak, there's a fuckton more magickers there than you all take into account, so who gives a shit if there happens to be four or five pc magickers sitting in one of the taverns? Honestly, with the way things are there that seems about right to me.

Besides the fact that one magicker spotted (as a blur or whatever) could be seen again later and mistaken for another magicker. Wow, if we have about 25% of the mages spotted outside counted two or three times it makes it appear as if there are more than there actually are.

Quote from: "jhunter"I couldn't disagree more. I think this is going way too far to one extreme. I don't know where you all are playing but unless I was personally playing a magicker or playing in Allanak, I haven't run into that many with my own pcs.

This is possibly part of the problem. I've played a few magicker PCs that have run into other PCs who've turned out to be magickers, but the manner of our meeting has been an awkward encounter in an out-of-the-way place, where we've evidently both gone to cast in peace. Great RP ensues for both of us. However, now, if for a significant number of secret magickers the out-of-the-way places they're meeting in are also frequented by hunters and tribespeople, then the hunters are going to be understandably aggrieved at running into magicker after magicker where ICly the magickers are meant to be relatively rare.

You'd only experience this if you had a Northern hunter who frequented areas that magickers liked to cast in. But, for these people, it seems to be a real issue. I never encountered any of the rogue muls in the wilds, either, but I'm quite sure they existed.

Quote from: "jhunter"Also, with all the gemmed in Allanak, there's a fuckton more magickers there than you all take into account, so who gives a shit if there happens to be four or five pc magickers sitting in one of the taverns? Honestly, with the way things are there that seems about right to me.

Sure, there are loads of magickers in 'Nak. But percentage-wise, they're not that large a part of the make-up of the city. Four or five magicker PCs in a tavern when there are eight or ten PCs total in there makes for a PC population that's one-half made up of magickers - way way too many. One or two magickers would not be unreasonable, but as soon as magicker PCs threaten to become the majority outside their quarter, the balance is destroyed.

Quote from: "jhunter"Besides the fact that one magicker spotted (as a blur or whatever) could be seen again later and mistaken for another magicker. Wow, if we have about 25% of the mages spotted outside counted two or three times it makes it appear as if there are more than there actually are.

But at most that would give you half as many magickers again, and would still account for the same number of magicker sightings.

Quote from: "Quirk"1) A gritty Zalanthas. The silk clad aides of Noble Houses, the servants and the guards and the nobles - none of these things ever properly felt like Arm to me. Playing at comfortable living in a large, static House led to the feel of Zalanthas being lost. The struggle was gone.

The Byn feels real, still, and the dirty 'Rinthers, and even the more successful hunters and crafters making a living and trying to build small groups up round them. The Zalanthas I'd like to see would feature few PCs in silk, and most of the organisations (not Houses, small-time merchants of below Byn-size) responsible for providing food and water for their members, not having it available automatically. It would be a struggle to survive, sometimes. And there would be lots of small-scale political RP; as Rindan said many moons ago, if we closed every part of Arm but the 'Rinth, and crammed everyone in there with no coded affiliations, intrigue would skyrocket.

Situations like this are the reason I dislike the Byn.  People start in the clan and assume, without a doubt, that it's somehow "more like Arm" than any other clan in the game.  Why?  Since when has an uneven distribution of resources been unrealistic in any setting?  Why shouldn't a class of people be living the high life while the masses suffer?  It may very well be one of the most realistic components in the Zalanthas experience.

Do you think a city where everyone is poor is realistic?  Cities must be controlled by an administration to function, and they're always going to be the wealthiest--the ones on top.  Should templars be impoverished and dressed in rags when there is a sufficient industry and resources to maintain them in luxury?

If anything, there seems to be a surplus of people that can be squandered as a resource of their own.  Note how much war the two city states are waging?  People vanish in one city, thrown into the arena for public execution in another.  There is something gritty about being one of the few haves in a world full of have-nots where the majority of a list of draconian laws can not even touch you.  It's a huge example of the blatant corruption in "civilization", if you could even call it that, where the masses are bred like cattle for the abject use of the few privileged with any true right to live and prospect. ;)

Quote from: "Cenghiz"I love playing magickers. I confess, I play elementalists again again except breaks given with merchants and rangers. Why? I love magickers. I love to play magickers. One of my last recent notes in my account is: "Good job with <magicker name>. Can handle all mages.". I'm known amongst staff as a good magicker player, I make in-depth, plot-forming, deceitful magickers and I try to make the game joyful for both me and players around me.

Whether or not you love playing a magicker has nothing to do with the possible problem that there are too many. I think there are way too many, there are times in Allanak where I see as many gemmed as non-gemmed hanging around, and while I don't know about the wild magickers since I rarely play non-city PCs, I've been told that there's quite a bit and that you can barely travel through an area without meeting one. We're not suggesting less magickers because we don't want you to have fun, we're doing it because it's against IC reality. Magickers are supposed to be very rare. Should you be allowed to play a bearded dwarf becase you would love to, even though it's against IC nature?

QuoteWe, magicker lovers are making the world more magickal IC. We're not dying, we're not revealing our identities till we grow in power, we're forming our own plots, allying against sorcerer kings, allying to live freely against dangers.. We're seeking treasures, making treasures, helping our little trade with a little bit of magick and remaining unknown. We, as gemmers, are being a good tool in the hands of the templerate and living in luxury in exchange. We are doing many things all of which are IC and then someone comes and says: "Magickers are too many.". So what? It's the players' choice. Noone forces me to play more and more elementalists. I myself choose to play more of them. If we're making a low-magick game high-magick - Arm? Low magick? Hehe... - it's the usual turn of events. It's the choice of some players and the staff does not want to chime in. So what's there to talk?

Again, I think you're typing a lot that has little meaning. You're making the world more magickal... not dying, seeking treasures, allying etc. - where's the relevance? The fact is that you're causing an imbalance in what is IC reality, and it doesn't matter what your PC is doing. I'm fairly certain that PC magickers far outnumber PC elves, which is just silly. And the argument that "it's the players' choice" is a bad one IMO, because it's also the player's obligation to not do something that skews the balance.

QuoteWe, as some magick-loving players, decided this era of Arm is the era of elementalism, when the rifts of the elements opened further and caused an increase in the elementalist population. It'll pass when everyone but true magicker-lovers like me decide to shift back to mundane. Wait for the end of the era.

You've decided that it's an era of elementalism? Is that for you to decide? Our PCs represent a tiny tiny minority of the population of Zalanthas. The problem is that there are too many magicker PCs relative to non-magickers. There may be like 20% magicker PCs compared to other PCs but they're not 20% of the world population, and unless I'm missing something and you have actually worked it out IC and with the agreement of the staff that you've created an era of elementalism, this sounds like a bad excuse to me.

End of the day, my point is that yes, you should in general terms be allowed to play what you want, but people who play magickers over and over and over are pulling the balance in the wrong direction. And there are consequences for other players because a lot of people like you are playing magickers almost exclusively. It's not as simple as "I want to do this, why won't you let me?". You're not only going against what is ICly natural, you're also potentially keeping others from playing a magicker of a certain type because you're "hogging the spot" over and over. The staff does restrict the amount of special-type characters in the game, as far as I've been told.

I'd wager a great many of these Northern magickers start off as secret magickers within Tuluk, and move into the wilds as their powers become harder to hide.

Solutions? I can think of a few, though not many of them seem particularly viable to me.

1) Make magickers rarer across the game.
a) by rejigging the karma system

It's what was done with muls. Conceivably the karma system could be rejigged so it went up to 10 and the first magickers started at 4. You could put half-elves in at 1 karma (without gaining any coded advantage, simply to keep their numbers down to more realistic proportions), desert elves at 2, half-giants at 3, Vivaduans (after perhaps a little adjustment to take them longer to become capable of surviving in the wilds) at 4, and then arrange the rest over 5-10 karma. Maybe to add to that, you could prevent people from special apping for characters costing more than five karma above what they possess. I don't think it would be a popular move, and I'm not suggesting it, but it would be a possible solution.

b) by making magickers harder to play

Magickers could be weakened code-wise to make them more at risk in the wilds early on. This would be unsatisfactory in a number of ways. There's no guarantee people who enjoy playing magicker characters won't just bite the bullet and keep on going, and it would just lead to new rounds of "twinky warriors keep attacking me solo in the wilds!"

c) by diverting magickers to a magicker-specific iso-clan somewhere

I think this is a pretty horrible solution. Magickers require karma and thus get handed out to seasoned roleplayers. If you tie up a serious proportion of the game's seasoned roleplayers in iso-clans, the rest of the game suffers. Much as people with immaculate emoting style, sophisticated characterisation and a genuine understanding of the gameworld may shudder when confronted by an hour spent with the tall, muscular man, if the tall, muscular man is ever to join the ranks of skilled RPers someone has to be around to show him the way.

2) Make magickers more viable to play wholly inside Tuluk.
a) because the templars don't waste time on minor threats

I touched on this in an earlier post. This would probably need a "grittier" PC population than we're ever likely to have, and is at perennial risk from bored players of militia and templars deciding that if something's technically illegal, they can take time out to care about it.

b) because there's a magicker underground that provides support, RP with fellow secret mages, and gives them places to go to do their magick that won't often be encroached on by non-magickers

This seems a more plausible solution than most to me. One issue, of course, is that magickers want to try out their powers for real for time to time, but I can think of places in or near Tuluk where magickers are already reputed to lurk which offer the chance for exploration and danger without taking to the wilds to annoy hunters. Ideally this would be achieved by a group of magicker PCs acting ICly, but we've had years for that to happen, and even some magickers trying that from time to time, and it doesn't seem to have arrived yet. It may need imm guidance to succeed.

3) Make magickers impossible to play inside Tuluk.
a) because the templarate catch them quickly

I don't think anyone wants this, and I'm not sure it would help greatly with the magicker-in-the-gentle-Northern-wilds syndrome. It would probably lead to an explosion in the number of gemmers.

I'm sure there are other solutions, I'll post any I come up with.

*sigh*  When will you people learn?  Armageddon has trends, fads, cycles, whatever you want to call it.

Apparantly, we're in a magicker phase right now.  A lot of people, for some reason or another, have made magicker PCs.  In a few months, though, most of them will probably die off and maybe dwarves will be the next big thing.  People will be complaining that suddenly half the PCs sitting in the tavern are stumpies, and that the playerbase is being irresponsible for not making their characters in proportion with Zalanthan demographics.  After that, half-elves could make a comeback, or maybe all the D-elf tribes will suck away players from the cities. :roll:

Now, granted, when the game is in a magicker phase people notice (and complain) about it more.  Magickers are more powerful than the other minorities and have a bigger impact on the game world.  They're more visible and thus player perceive them as a bigger problem than when there are too many half-elves around.

I totally agree with Marauder Moe here. We have posts about "too many magickers" right now. Before it we had posts about "too many d-elves" and before it about "too many half-breeds". Wait a few months, the trend changes again and you will have chance to complain about something else.

*shrug*

In regards to whatever happens to be occurring in the wilderness (though I'm finding this a bit hard to believe, personally), the idea that all of the magickers are flocking to the same places to cast is either a lack of creativity on the players' parts or simply a wide dissemination of information they're not supposed to have.  If hunter npcs have been placed in the area that were not there before, it could be the imms' collective way of saying, "this is not a private place: get out."  If the hint isn't taken, there's a problem there.

I very much dislike the mul example in regards to this.  I have no intention of ever being forced to play a gemmer, as my favorite pc type is rogue magickers.  I play responsibly and keep a low profile, and I have no desire to have my playing style and personal attempts at creativity stemmed off because a few players couldn't handle playing wild mages.  It's easier than you can imagine to find places no one else goes in a wilderness as big as Arm's.  If people are coincidentally finding each other, they're not trying very hard or they're trying to find other mages.

The biggest problem with these discussions is that many of the posters are attempting to control the rest of the playerbase because they believe their personal vision of Armageddon is somehow more valid.  Players have always taken the documentation to the next level of severity, and I believe the game has suffered for it.  We've gone from the idea of magickers being distrusted and barely tolerated to being so hated and feared, even in Allanak, that players are saying it's within their characters' rights to kill them.  Then you get into half-elves, the outsiders of society.  Sure, it's one thing to be racist and dismissive to these characters, but now we've gotten to the point where people do a quick assess, figure out what you are and the entire room ignores you.  And so the bar keeps getting raised more and more, until the game stops being a single game and breaks down into several miniature games.

I think, overall, what I'm trying to say is this: Common sense factors into all of this better than a ridiculous blanket rule.  If any of the playerbase could be accused of having common sense, we wouldn't need the imms to run the game...so trust them to make policy, not any of the people posting here.

Quote from: "Intrepid"Situations like this are the reason I dislike the Byn.  People start in the clan and assume, without a doubt, that it's somehow "more like Arm" than any other clan in the game.  Why?  Since when has an uneven distribution of resources been unrealistic in any setting?  Why shouldn't a class of people be living the high life while the masses suffer?  It may very well be one of the most realistic components in the Zalanthas experience.

But I didn't begin in the Byn, nor did I play in it at all until pretty late in my Arm career. The problem I have with the game is not that we have an uneven distribution of resources, but that PCs are predominantly members of the most stagnant layer of society, the top tier.

Quote from: "Intrepid"Do you think a city where everyone is poor is realistic?  Cities must be controlled by an administration to function, and they're always going to be the wealthiest--the ones on top.  Should templars be impoverished and dressed in rags when there is a sufficient industry and resources to maintain them in luxury?

No, nor did I even suggest this. My beef is that in a city where the majority are poor, the PCs are generally not. Arm is billed as a harsh, hard desert world - and, for some PCs, it is - but for a great many it's a tale of silks and Noble Houses. Zalanthas goes to war, and the majority of the PCs in at least one of the camps are House-affiliated; the dirty commoners making up much of the army are under-represented.

Quote from: "Intrepid"There is something gritty about being one of the few haves in a world full of have-nots where the majority of a list of draconian laws can not even touch you.  It's a huge example of the blatant corruption in "civilization", if you could even call it that, where the masses are bred like cattle for the abject use of the few privileged with any true right to live and prospect. ;)

There's nothing "gritty" about it when the have-nots are a minority of the PC culture. You might as well call "gritty" a MUD about the doings in a posh manor house between urbane nobility, because the lower classes are represented by a few stableboy and valet PCs and there's a VNPC world out there of poor peasants.

If the templars and successful merchants are rich, stupendously rich, but most of the PCs are desperately seeking their next meal - yes, the grittiness is still there, thrown into sharp relief by the existence of the upper classes. But when the game focuses on the upper classes, the grittiness recedes into the background.

I don't know where you're currently playing, but there isn't a place in the southlands that's like that at the moment.  You may be experiencing a deficifiency in warriors now that there is a war going on, but I can assure you that, at two days prior to the HRPT, the haves weren't even in the public eye but were in small supply and the have-nots were crowding the public taverns.

Quote from: "Intrepid"Players have always taken the documentation to the next level of severity, and I believe the game has suffered for it.  We've gone from the idea of magickers being distrusted and barely tolerated to being so hated and feared, even in Allanak, that players are saying it's within their characters' rights to kill them.  Then you get into half-elves, the outsiders of society.  Sure, it's one thing to be racist and dismissive to these characters, but now we've gotten to the point where people do a quick assess, figure out what you are and the entire room ignores you.  And so the bar keeps getting raised more and more, until the game stops being a single game and breaks down into several miniature games.

And here I think we curve gently back into agreement. Reactions to magickers are frequently ridiculous. Magickers are unnatural, unpredictable and thoroughly untrustworthy - but the average Zalanthan commoner has more serious fears to contend with, such as starvation, drought, ending up permanently maimed in the risky lines of work she's forced to undertake, or being casually killed by a petty thug or even a rival. Again, Earth history tells us that (early) humans believing themselves surrounded by powerful, hostile spirit forces as they scraped a meager living in harsh and dangerous lands tried instead to propitiate their demon-gods and win their indulgence. A magicker is not a being a Zalanthan seeks aid of lightly, but such aid is a solution far preferable to more certain risks of death.

Not to derail, but I remember a few months ago people were complaining that it seemed like 1/2 of the PCs in Tuluk were half-elves..

We see a lot more people with the karma to play magickers lately, there has been tons of great tips on how to get noticed and gain karma, and like Halaster said, there's probably more players with the karma than there is players actually losing the karma to play them.. And it's just going to keep growing as more and more players take the tips from fellow GDBers on how to improve their roleplay..

It took me a very long while to gain enough karma to play magickers, and after playing one, I'm not sure I'll go back to them.. So people are probably gaining karma lately, and are curious about magickers, just like I was.. I'm going back to mundane classes now, but give it a few weeks, it'll eventually go back to less magickers, more half elves, less half elves, more burglars..

Remember the thread about too many burglars and should they be a karma class as well?

Quote from: "Intrepid"I don't know where you're currently playing, but there isn't a place in the southlands that's like that at the moment.  You may be experiencing a deficifiency in warriors now that there is a war going on, but I can assure you that, at two days prior to the HRPT, the haves weren't even in the public eye but were in small supply and the have-nots were crowding the public taverns.

We probably play different hours. Two days prior to the HRPT for me, there were plentiful (I believe majority-numbers) House Guards and aides and crafters on display in the Barrel, an on-and-off noble and templar presence, a gemmer or two, and nary an elf nor 'rinthi in sight.

The Gaj, meanwhile, was empty and collecting dust as far as PCs went.

Yes, I agree there is a bit too much hand wringing going on here.  There are more magickers because there are more players in general.  Many of these players have earned karma, and with this the right to play a magicker.

There are some upcoming trends which will naturally cull the number of magickers.  People pick magickers because they want something somewhat different to play.  More options are opening up.  We have halflings opening for play. I'm sure that will suck away some magickers.  We have a gob load of new noble positions opening in the north.  This will suck away magickers.  

If we get far more players, other interesting "things" can be opened up for play to serve as a relief valve.  Gith, mantis, Setinal rising from the sands, pirates captaining a silt skimmer (yes I'm kidding).  Things will find their balance in time. Patience grasshopper.

To address some of the OP's original points.  I would dislike seeing magickers with more "productive" things to do in the north.  Being terrified of exposure and struggling to survive and be relevant in the north is part of the experience.   It could stand to reason, the cause of all the mages roaming the wastes is that they are driven out of Tuluk.   I still contend that traveling the roads is too safe anyway.

To address the "fear factor", I used to be afraid to travel from Tuluk to Allanak. It was scary, mostly because I ooc'ly didn't know what was out there. Now I do, Even under the worst of conditions (baring sandstorms) I have little to no OOC fear.  The same holds true for magickers. As you become familiar with them, you OOCly fear them less.  You can't turn back the clock, you know what you know.

Servants are not the same as nobles.  It's actually well in the spirit of Allanak that there are very few independents in the city, as every commoner is "owned" by someone or they're a criminal.  Allanak is the city of organizations.

Quote from: "Intrepid"Servants are not the same as nobles.  It's actually well in the spirit of Allanak that there are very few independents in the city, as every commoner is "owned" by someone or they're a criminal.  Allanak is the city of organizations.

Uh? Where are you getting this from?

http://www.armageddon.org/general/ranktable.html

You'll note that relatively few PCs would fall into the "House Servant" category; most are in the Guard or Aide positions, significantly higher on the social scale. You will also note that commoners are not the same as either House Servants or Slaves of the Templarate.

This is completely at odds with the docs, and the in game nature of the city.

I have one contention with Amoeba's post.. the more I know about magickers the more I DO fear them.

Heh.

<quote>Magickers are unnatural, unpredictable and thoroughly untrustworthy</quote>

No, I don't agree with this blanket statement.

They are perceived as being this way, but it doesn't mean they are this way. They are in fact natural (since they appear in nature), and their personalities are as varied as "mundanes" are.

Quote from: "Anonymous kank with wings"No, I don't agree with this blanket statement.

They are perceived as being this way, but it doesn't mean they are this way. They are in fact natural (since they appear in nature), and their personalities are as varied as "mundanes" are.

Sorry, I'd rather hoped from the context (the reaction of commoners to magickers) that it would be abundantly apparent that this was "commoner perception". However, I'm willing to explicitly state it as such if it makes you happy.

I think there are too many magickers in-game but i feel its a problem that should be handled ICly...


icly i think there is a feeling that there have been alot of magicker sighting and attacks however what do you think the IC consequences are going to be?. Magickers are like serial killers on the lose to most...one is bad...more then one you got a problem...Fear will eventually turn into anger.

Its has already been said that there are now enormous IC incentives for people to now go <kill magicker> as opposed to fleeing. Once the fad is over or the magickers learn more discresion or they simple get hunted and kill off...i am sure things return normal. If not expect the game to react accordingly ICly. Its also something to think about before making any boohoo they are killing us on sight threads.

Quote from: "Intrepid"If any of the playerbase could be accused of having common sense, we wouldn't need the imms to run the game...so trust them to make policy, not any of the people posting here.

Every single one of the Imms was once a player.  Good ideas, on topic discussion, and debate that can affect game policy are not the sole province of the Immortal.  They have chosen a position granted the responsibility to discuss, implement, and enforce such policy.  Discrediting the opinions of those who do not share the label is naive.

Many discussions that have begun upon these boards have resulted in direct or indirect policy changes, code changes, additions, and features.  What other forum is there for open debate between players and staff on the direction of the game, its features, or policies?  No.  This is exactly a place in which policy can be made, or changed.  Where ideas can be discussed, accepted, or rejected.  Where attention can be focused on aspects of the game that may merit discussion.

There is an inconsistency between what the documentation claims, and what has been practiced with regards to the rarity and mystery of magick.  The Imm Staff have made plain they want magickers to be a powerful and fearful force in the gameworld, but some players have begun to feel overwhelmed by a common (or least not uncommon) magickal presence that wasn't represented so strongly in years past.  My post was designed as a viewpoint of how IC events may have caused these feelings to arise, an analysis on why that may be good/bad for the game, and a request for feedback and suggestions on how it may be addressed in the next few years.

Power must be tempered with frequency, otherwise balance will be lost.  What player will walk the sands a lesser being when the clear choice becomes, "Play a magicker or become their prey."  I've always felt the heavy handed use of magick in the game robs us of several layers of RP due to the disparity in power.  When Sorcerer 'X' gathers Army "Y" and marches against Civilization "Z" for the 10th time, why must we feel as if there is little to be done for the mundane folk of the world?  (I feel the new HRPT and SimWar effort is a godsend and vastly superior model to previous large scale events.)

If I see a bear in the woods, I might feel thrilled, scared, excited, nervous, and a great many emotions because such a thing is rare and powerful.  Something I've usually only heard of in stories.  When I see five such bears, on a semi-regular basis, they cease to wondrous and mighty creatures, and start to become dangerous and troublesome adversaries.  My "fear" of the bear will be lost through proximity and frequency of interaction.  I will respect what it can do, but I will find ways to trap it, kill it, or chase it off.

This is what the Cataclysm did.  It turned one bear in the wild into ten.  Instead of being a frightening, wondrous, rare, and powerful experience, it has become a troublesome and, for some, commonplace encounter.

Like I said, I don't want to stop people from playing magickers.  Play them, but I'd like to see some kind of social RP made available for the northern magicker to provide both the magicker players and the mundane players a choice for a non-violent lifestyle.  Predator/prey is too limited and narrow niche in which to place so fearsome a beast as the elementalist.

-LoD

Quote from: "Quirk"Sorry, I'd rather hoped from the context (the reaction of commoners to magickers) that it would be abundantly apparent that this was "commoner perception". However, I'm willing to explicitly state it as such if it makes you happy.

Yes, I was aware that was probably what you meant. Only three extra words were required to make that a certainty.

Never bite my head off. It's certain to give you indigestion.  :lol:

I don't want to step into this debate much so...yes at times there are lots of magickers.  As others have said it's a cycle.  As for what should be done about it...

1)  I have a feeling hunters are finding magickers in specific spots in the wild, not so much wandering the roads.  Why not begin to develop IC superstitions about that place, organize large hunting parties if you're a mage hater or otherwise just react to it IC other than "Oh boy, sure are a lot of magickers out today."

2)  More people should give gemmed mages a try.  Having played a long lived gemmer I'd have to say that sometimes the population does get a bit big and you see plenty of them in the Barrel.  At other times the population is almost dead, especially in any mages above 2 karma.  Some more vets need to give it another try  :wink:  [derail] As for people seeing way too many gemmers in one place...well there really only is one place for the gemmed to socialize in Allanak.  The Traders is idiotic to hang out in and the Gaj just about as idiotic because you're more likely to get in a fight than to be able to drink ale in peace [/derail]

3)  Lastly I wouldn't mind seeing a cap on people playing mages over and over and over again.  Maybe a timer of one to three months before said player can play a mage after his last one dies.  I'm strongly opposed to any rehashing of the karma system or queue system outside of special app and I do feel people who play nothing but magicker PCs with maybe a break from time to time are the root of this perceived problem.  There is a lot to love about mage classes and I understand why people like them so much but people should try to exercise responsibility in limiting themselves to play a variety of mundane roles.  If it becomes clear people can't and staff sees it as detrimental to the game then perhaps it must be enforced as well.

I don't agree that magickers is just a phase or a cycle.

I believe that it is simply a situation that is propegated by the fact that as time goes on more and more people get the karma to play a magicker.  Naturally, at some point, these people will play their magicker option to explore the role.

After the first magicker many people begin exploring the rest of their magick karma roles.  Others will alternate between magick role and non-magick role.  

There is nothing wrong with this - this is how the karma system is set up.  

The way to counter balance this is to either make changes to the karma system or to recruit more and more people.  We have a situation where, as of my last checking of the poll, 75% of the players who reads the GDB are capable of playing magickers.  This percentage has remained steady.

What does this really mean?  This means that the pool of available players to play magickers is constantly increasing, in terms of percentage, and therefore we will continue to see more and more magickers in the game as an overall percentage assuming we continue to grow at our current rate.  

As the game matures and more and more people get karma they will, naturally, play the karma options now available to them.  The majority of karma options are magick based roles.  

Therefore, as time goes on, we will see more and more magickers in the game.  Again, this is how karma has been set up and one of the consequences of a maturing player base.  

So, let's get out there and recruit more people to keep the ratio of magickers to non-magickers down.  Otherwise another can of worms might need to be opened - changes to the karma system due to the fact that Armageddon is a maturing RPI.

Quote from: "LoD"Every single one of the Imms was once a player.  Good ideas, on topic discussion, and debate that can affect game policy are not the sole province of the Immortal.  They have chosen a position granted the responsibility to discuss, implement, and enforce such policy.  Discrediting the opinions of those who do not share the label is naive.

I didn't discredit the opinions, I discredited the notion that your and anyone else's attempts to place blanket policy on the portrayal of magickers is lacking in common sense.  It's naive to think that your way fits everyone.  You're just trying to play junior imm.  Again, I might add.

Quote from: "LoD"Many discussions that have begun upon these boards have resulted in direct or indirect policy changes, code changes, additions, and features.  What other forum is there for open debate between players and staff on the direction of the game, its features, or policies?  No.  This is exactly a place in which policy can be made, or changed.  Where ideas can be discussed, accepted, or rejected.  Where attention can be focused on aspects of the game that may merit discussion.

See, this is the problem with your all or nothing viewpoint, LoD--you start making broad claims about the gdb.  I never said discussion was inappropriate, I said that we can't be counted on as a whole to make policy due to a collective lack of common sense.  Look how you just took the ribbon and ran with it.  Do you think you're showing common sense right now by assigning the very blanket statements I'm telling you lacks that common sense?  No rule is totalitarian.  Every law must take into account extenuating circumstances or they lose their initial meaning.  The problem with making an all or nothing rule on magickers is the exact same as my saying there is a lack of common sense on the gdb and you misinterpreting that to mean that all discussion is bad.  Despite your erroneous and possibly suspect claims, there are responsible players out there who are not playing obvious magickers up north and purposely ruining your playtime, so the idea of your implementation of a blanket rule to curtail everyone is absurd.

Quote from: "LoD"There is an inconsistency between what the documentation claims, and what has been practiced with regards to the rarity and mystery of magick.  The Imm Staff have made plain they want magickers to be a powerful and fearful force in the gameworld, but some players have begun to feel overwhelmed by a common (or least not uncommon) magickal presence that wasn't represented so strongly in years past.  My post was designed as a viewpoint of how IC events may have caused these feelings to arise, an analysis on why that may be good/bad for the game, and a request for feedback and suggestions on how it may be addressed in the next few years.

There always has been.  At one point, people were being too friendly with magickers.  Now, in Allanak especially, the very idea of magickers--despite having grown up in a city with a quarter of magickers and tales of fire-wielding templars and sorceror kings that can turn into dragons--we have these aspirant homcidal maniacs in each and every citizen pc in Nak.  I mean, really--some of the same people complaining about Tuluk being soft are acting the same Tulukis do about magick.  If you're in Nak, they're pariahs but they're Tek's pariahs.  If you in Tuluk, they're hated and hunted.  If you're in Red Storm, it's don't ask, don't tell.  Your initial post regarding is fine, it's the idea of dictating conclusions that you and several others have been straining to accrue for months now that bothers me.  I always put a lot of work into creating a character, whether it be a half-giant soldier or a half-elf ranger or an elven magicker, and as a result, my characters, all of them, survive for a long time.  When playing a magickers, I put thought into their methodology, and most of my pcs of that type have been rogue magickers because I find the concept of keeping it secret satisfying.  And that's just it--I do keep it secret.  Why should I be punished in your blanket solution just because a few people can't handle the role?  This is where common sense is denied in favor of an overarching rule proposed by someone who thinks it looks good in print.  The truth of the matter is that the imms are seeing a very different game than most of us are, and seeing a bigger picture.  This is why I believe players are in less of a position to make proper judgements on behalf of the rest of the playerbase.

Quote from: "LoD"Power must be tempered with frequency, otherwise balance will be lost.  What player will walk the sands a lesser being when the clear choice becomes, "Play a magicker or become their prey."  I've always felt the heavy handed use of magick in the game robs us of several layers of RP due to the disparity in power.  When Sorcerer 'X' gathers Army "Y" and marches against Civilization "Z" for the 10th time, why must we feel as if there is little to be done for the mundane folk of the world?  (I feel the new HRPT and SimWar effort is a godsend and vastly superior model to previous large scale events.)

There are no small parts.  Only small roleplayers.  If you feel dwarfed by a magicker when you didn't before, I'm glad.  The code is catching up with the fear you should have roleplaying all along.  That said, I've never felt inadequate playing a ranger or a burglar.  In fact, I consider these classes to be extremely powerful, so I often look askance at anyone, especially in this case, feeling that magickers are somehow instakill machines.  Yes, they're powerful, but again, regardless of what the distribution level is, there will always be someone griping about the number of magickers.  Why not just make your own plot instead of waiting for the next sorceror?  If you're having a problem with widescale plots with magicker npcs or even the occasional pc, don't take it out on all magicker pcs as a whole.  Again, this is where the blanket rulings lack common sense.

Quote from: "LoD"If I see a bear in the woods, I might feel thrilled, scared, excited, nervous, and a great many emotions because such a thing is rare and powerful.  Something I've usually only heard of in stories.  When I see five such bears, on a semi-regular basis, they cease to wondrous and mighty creatures, and start to become dangerous and troublesome adversaries.  My "fear" of the bear will be lost through proximity and frequency of interaction.  I will respect what it can do, but I will find ways to trap it, kill it, or chase it off.

You know, I find this instance suspect.  It's conveniently the biggest proponents of wrangling in the legion of wilderness mages that have had these apocryphal encounters with them.  When?  Where?  Did you send concrete proof to the imms?  May I get your autograph?  If you went to a known magicker hideout and found them, that's asking for an instagak.  if you had a freak occurrence with known mages, that's all it is.  The imms keep telling you guys that they don't comprise as large a portion of the playerbase as you believe they do.  Freak occurrence does not equate to common example and should not set precedence for overall policy.

Quote from: "LoD"This is what the Cataclysm did.  It turned one bear in the wild into ten.  Instead of being a frightening, wondrous, rare, and powerful experience, it has become a troublesome and, for some, commonplace encounter.

Like I said, I don't want to stop people from playing magickers.  Play them, but I'd like to see some kind of social RP made available for the northern magicker to provide both the magicker players and the mundane players a choice for a non-violent lifestyle.  Predator/prey is too limited and narrow niche in which to place so fearsome a beast as the elementalist.

No, we have this on the hearsay of a couple of players' isolated encounters that have turned into alarmist hysteria about mages in play.  Now, if the imms have been running too many mage encounters for RPTs, that's not a reason to punish the magick-using pcs.  I like the idea of Tuluk being anti-magick, I just dislike the idea of Zalanthas being so facistly anti-magick that the playerbase can't even see straight, because many of us seem to go nuts at the first opportunity to kill something/someone.  You're only as much prey as you allow yourself to be, and there's more than one way to deal with a magicker than attacking them.

We as a playerbase need to start thinking outside the box, as we've started to cleave so hard to the rules of the setting that we've forgotten how to make up options for ourselves.

Addressing the OP:
I found your timeline of Northern history to be rather interesting, but I don't really agree that any of these developments are bad or detrimental.

Quote:arrow: The Cataclysm teaches northerners that "magick is bad, mmkay?" Norrthern players begin hunting magickers, killing them on sight.

This was an IC event. It only seems reasonable that there would be IC repercussions.

Quote:arrow: No longer able to enjoy relative peace while they gain enough proficiency to protect themselves from mundane threats, the elementalist guilds are reworked to be given more useful spells earlier and faster progression through the tree.

There're a few things at work here. Yes, magick and the spell trees have changed a lot in the past few years (not that I'm in a position to know, or anything. I haven't been able to play magickers until fairly recently). But this was to address a real problem- many spells, and in fact, entire guilds were broken, or not as scary as they should have been. A couple of years ago, I commonly heard bone-headed comments like, "we can take 'em, guys, he's just a Rukkian!" If people are afraid of magickers now, or feel they are "overpowered", then good. They should be.
Also, keep in mind that many of the new spells are useless. Halaster mentioned it on the boards once that a lot of the new stuff is just eye candy. So just because you see 'five new Krathi spells' on the update archive doesn't mean it'll be five different permutations of fireball. They might be spells that allow the caster to boil water, or telepathically pick his butt, or something similar. No big deal.

Quote:arrow: Those players choosing to create northern magickers were now predators or prey, or both. They no longer had a peaceful role to assume within the northern city-state, but were forced instead of be "on the run" and acknowledge that an entire civilization would likely only ever consider them an abomination to be executed as soon as possible.

The fear and hatred of magickers is one of the very few things I actually like about New Tuluk. Please, please don't take this away. What would we be left with? High art and subtlety? Half-elves lounging in the Sanctuary? No. Fanatical hatred of magickers is crucial to the entire "atmosphere" of Tuluk.
I think, therefore, that any sort of "peaceful" magicker living openly and comfortably within the system would be not only unfeasible, but detrimental.

Quote:arrow: Magickers are pushed out of Tuluk and forced to find locations in which they can survive and practice their craft. These places happen to be the very same places frequented by isolated desert elf and nomadic human tribes, forcing these players to interact with these new magickal threats that normally were not commonly found.

This is, in my mind, a good thing. Gives those isolated tribesmen something to do! Besides, this is a simple aspect of the gameworld.
Magickers are outcasts. Outcasts live alone in the desert. Therefore, the desert has its fair share of magickers. This is a major reason why the city-states exist. People put up with draconian templars and scheming nobles because those big walls keep them safe from the evil magickers, monsters and raiders roaming about.

Quote:arrow: Now we have every magicker (not just sorcerers and magickers choosing to raid) running around the northern wilderness trying desperately (or not so desperately) to survive. There are few mundane organizations with which they can interact because most of them consider magickers highly dangerous and will kill them on sight.

Magickers should be trying desperately to survive. I don't see what the problem is here. You say you want to see less magickers, and the solution you propose is to give them some form of amnesty in the North? Huh? Magick, and the hatred thereof, is a big part of Armageddon, and I wouldn't want to see either reduced or eliminated.
Now, if your problem is with what current magickers are doing (raiding, throwing their weight around, becoming unrealistically strong), then that's a problem that can be easily addressed without re-writing Tuluki history.
First of all, players can simply choose to play non-violent magickers, and lead by example. All the magickers I've ever played, (three to date), have been non-violent, in fact. Never threatening anybody, never killing anybody, complying with demands, etc. This, of course, opens up more avenues for interaction... instead of taking your d-elf tribe out to kill that evil water-witch, maybe you could strike a deal with the devil, and secure a new water-source for your tribe?
And, of course, if you keep encountering magickers, and they're throwing their weight around like crazy, you can always report them. Just send a short little e-mail saying, "hey, this guy keeps threatening my tribe. He doesn't seem to understand that we're a hundred strong, and ICly quite able to quite his ass". You might have to send out one of these e-mails per magicker, but still, they should get the picture pretty quick.
And finally, if you're really desperate to get the magicker population down... special app a Nilazi. Hehehe.
Addressing other posters:
1. As already stated by some (including the staff in earlier topics), this is a fad. This is a trend. This too shall pass.
2. Have you ever considered that perhaps there is an IC reason why you are seeing more and more powerful magickers?
3. As already stated, there are more people with the karma to play magickers than there were previously. Also, some people (like me) prefer to play magickers, so we just need to let the babies have their bottles. And although no one actually means it, these topics sometimes stink of elitism for me. It's as if the newbs are finally getting access to magickers, and the oldbies are freaking out about it.
4. Some of us like to play magickers. If it were up to me, I'd play one every other character, if not every character. But I don't- I'm more than willing to make a few concessions out of courtesy for other players. I've been resisting the urge to store my current character and app a magicker for the past week or so, in fact.
But this is a game. And people play games to have fun. I have fun with magickers, and I know I'm not the only one. And, frankly, all this talk about "don't play magickers, it hurts the gameworld" make me want to leave the gameworld.
5. I feel that some of the current "magicker epidemic" is basically just hype. I have, personally, met maybe five or six "wild magickers" with my mundane characters... and that's counting four years of playing, not just the current influx. When I hear people say stuff like "you need to be a magicker to survive in the wild these days", I just have to laugh, because:
A) A newbie ranger is far better equipped to survive in the wild than a newbie magicker,
B) some magickers, even after 30+ days of playing, are still not particularly good at surviving in the wilds, and
C) it's just blatant exaggeration.
Chillax, everybody, wait this out, and enjoy the light show as all the Krathis eventually blow themselves up.

I saw magickers do the conga line from 'Nak to Tuluk. Nerf!!11111 :x

Quote from: "FiveDisgruntledMonkeysWit"
Also, keep in mind that many of the new spells are useless. Halaster mentioned it on the boards once that a lot of the new stuff is just eye candy

I did?  Hunh.  When?  'cause that ain't necessarily true, we've put in a few nasties.

I do agree with LoD in that the current trend is a result of a long chain of IC events, on some level.  Mages in the north are forced into certain niches and roles (not unlike a gemmer?).  This is important to understand:  Tuluk made a choice, and Tuluk is living with the results of that choice.  I'm not saying we shouldn't have made that choice for the city, I think it's cool.  Things are unbalanced - and I like it that way.  It's never been meant to be balanced.

I don't disagree with LoD entirely, though I'm not as worried or perceive it to be as big of a problem.   The game changes, and I like that it changes, and has changed.

Having said that, I would also like to see 'other' things for mages in the wilds to do than what they have.

Halaster wrote:

QuoteFiveDisgruntledMonkeysWit wrote:

QuoteAlso, keep in mind that many of the new spells are useless. Halaster mentioned it on the boards once that a lot of the new stuff is just eye candy

I did? Hunh. When? 'cause that ain't necessarily true, we've put in a few nasties.

Well, that wasn't exactly what you said. You said at first you spent a lot of time on making the "nasties", making magickers nice and scary and everything... and now, with that more or less accomplished, you're working on making it "pretty", I believe your terminology was.
My point was that not ALL of the new spells are Fireballs and Lightning. A few are Magic Missiles and Prestidigitation.
I'll try and find the link, if you'd like.

Quote from: "FiveDisgruntledMonkeysWit"Addressing the OP:
I found your timeline of Northern history to be rather interesting, but I don't really agree that any of these developments are bad or detrimental.

I don't believe they are inherently bad or detrimental either.  I was using the timeline as an explanation for why some players (who have been posting in other threads) may feel there are "too many magickers".  I don't personally feel there -are- too many, just that these events have removed them from an environment where they blended into a much larger society and dumped them squarely into BFE leaving a few surprised tribals saying, "WTF!?"

The problem is there's no limited source of magicker apps.  There's nothing stemming the flow of brand new magickers popping up as soon as the previous one got themselves killed.  And so mundane players sharing land with these "secret magick folk" are being forced to deal with them much more regularly than years past.  The magick they can wield is amazingly powerful, to the point where tribes might feel bullied by at least the frequency (if not the volume) of the magicker presence.

Quote from: "FiveDisgruntledMonkeysWit"Magickers should be trying desperately to survive. I don't see what the problem is here. You say you want to see less magickers, and the solution you propose is to give them some form of amnesty in the North? Huh? Magick, and the hatred thereof, is a big part of Armageddon, and I wouldn't want to see either reduced or eliminated.

I didn't propose a solution.  I certainly didn't request magickers to receive amnesty.  What I asked for were suggestions on how we can give the rogue magicker in the northlands something to do other than "get buff, get bored, get bold."  I see them teetering on the same edge that halflings, gith, and mantis often walk; what RP potential do we have as a group if our niche role is generally "hated and hunted"?  We may have a few moments where someone decides to go against the generally accepted method of interaction (w;w;draw sword;scream;kill magicker), but the bulk of the interaction will probably be magickers defending themselves.

I'd like to see more opportunities for magickers to pursue aspects of a normal life were available as part of a community.  Having relationships, raising a family, tending to a home, pursuing a career, making friends, balancing fun with work.  I fear that rogue magickers have a tendency to play the "secretive mage" more because of a lack of options than a lack of creativity.

I'd just like to see more options.

-LoD

Hmm. I can imagine a dwarven mage setting his focus to be the establishment of a sanctuum somewhere in the Northlands, and gather mages and mundane dwarves to his call. They could build a tower/fortress, perhaps on the spur of the Shield Wall with Kurac's blessing. The sanctuum would be self-sustaining, but open for trade. Nothing but a full-fledged siege would take it down.

This would help to put the mages back into the ant farm and give the dwarves a stronghold of their own at the same time.

Quote from: "LoD"I'd like to see more opportunities for magickers to pursue aspects of a normal life were available as part of a community.  Having relationships, raising a family, tending to a home, pursuing a career, making friends, balancing fun with work.  I fear that rogue magickers have a tendency to play the "secretive mage" more because of a lack of options than a lack of creativity.

Are you saying that some of the playerbase are being just a mage as their occupation and goals?  If so, I would have to agree with you, and this may be why you've seen mages with no discretion.

This kind of situation is an error, as all character concepts should revolve around some idea or angle from which they approach life.  Magick may simplify or complicate this approach.  It could even be some form of alter ego.  The help files regarding mage creation state that all mages are people first and mages second.

Quote from: "Intrepid"Are you saying that some of the playerbase are being just a mage as their occupation and goals?  If so, I would have to agree with you, and this may be why you've seen mages with no discretion.

Yes.  I'm further saying that the present arrangement (rogue magickers in the wild) breeds this type of behavior because of a lack of options.  There is no "magicker hideout" or "magicker haven" that they can choose to dwell within and socialize with their peers, build a home, have a job, etc...  Magickers had this option when Old Tuluk still permitted them within its walls.  The illusion of acceptance through tolerance was enough to give these people a much broader range of roles; employees of Houses, friends of street thugs, scouts of the City, misunderstood friends...

Without the city, or some community, allowing magickers a chance to pursue something without the fear of being "discovered", players are more apt to slip into a series of stereotypes and/or similar roles playing the raider, the invisible bully, the avenger, etc... Partially because they are given few other options, and partially because it's the easier of two roads to travel.  Why have parents when I can pretend they're dead.  Why worry about a family when I can be a "rogue magicker"?  Why have relationships when I'm always running around the desert?  Why lead a peaceful life when everyone's trying to kill me?

The "on the run" setup is conducive to repetitive character concepts that focus too much on common themes of vengeance, mischief, dominance, and violence.  I'd like to see more options provided for ungemmed mages besides playing "mage vs. everyone".

-LoD

Maybe I'm being dense... but isn't the elementalist quarter of Allanak a haven where magickers can socialize and openly be magickers (relativly) without fear?  Why does the game require another such place?

Quote from: "Marauder Moe"Maybe I'm being dense... but isn't the elementalist quarter of Allanak a haven where magickers can socialize and openly be magickers (relativly) without fear?  Why does the game require another such place?

Because, apparently, those very Magickers are still extremely restricted in their interaction due to the all the laws placed upon them.

Laws?  They're restricted in their interactions with mundanes because most mundanes don't like them, as it should be.  There's no laws against gemmed socializing with other gemmed, though.

LoD seems to be saying, if I read it right, that rogue magickers live only to grow powerful and raid mundanes because they have no other options.  That's ridiculous, though.  They can choose to make a gemmed magicker, or they can choose to make a hidden magicker.  Each choice (wild, hidden, or gemmed) has its advantages and its disadvantages.  Desiring a magicker haven free of the influence of either city where magickers can frolic and do happy sparkly magick things all day long sounds like wanting to have your cake and eat it too.

I agree that many ungemmed are forced to be a magicker before being something else, like a tailor or a jeweler or what-have-you, as LoD is suggesting.  However, I think there is some IC justification for this as well.  Most people are taught that magickers are magickers.  It doesn't matter what they do, because first and foremost, they are a foul, dirty, curse-wielding maniac.

Quote from: "Marauder Moe"Maybe I'm being dense... but isn't the elementalist quarter of Allanak a haven where magickers can socialize and openly be magickers (relativly) without fear?  Why does the game require another such place?

You are being dense, since the original post was almost entirely concerned with "hidden" elementalists inhabiting the northlands regions.

-- X

Quote from: "Marauder Moe"LoD seems to be saying, if I read it right, that rogue magickers live only to grow powerful and raid mundanes because they have no other options.

That's not what I read, at least in the initial posts.  I assumed this was another in the series on game changes (qv., tribal and merchant topics) - which carried more of a nostalgic "I remember when.." quality for me, rather than a "This is broken." feel.

That said, I dislike much of the sentiment in this thread.  The analogy to the smashed anthill seems to support that the OP is not implying that there are too many magickers (further buttressed by numbers posted by staff), but that they are "too visible."  I will likewise not concede that there are too many players playing magickers (I don't see the evidence) and further do not want to be restricted from what I can choose to create.  [Proposed limits to allowed number of classes are (imho) artificial and cannot account for different types of players (40hr/week vs the 4hr/week player, for example).]

Touching on the Cataclysm- to share a shortened real-world anecdote:  prior to 9/11, I lived a pretty swinging lifestyle.  For close to a decade, I worked for various consulting firms, and thanks to the booming bubble, my road-warrior career paid off with great perks.  Following the Event (and ignoring other factors like diminished corporate IT spending - work was there, just not as lucrative), travel evolved from a seamless routine to an onerous process - so much so, that it became the deciding factor in my coming off the road.  I, and people like me (surprisingly many), began to infiltrate the local corporate climate; employees who have been in their positions for five, eight, twelve years not only remain locked in their roles, but now report to a new breed of peers and management who entered with higher salaries, better titles.  I evolved domestically; I now have two kids and a life in suburbia.

The point?  Things happen that are beyond control and the rules change.

Things will adapt again.  Players do have an ability to shape the world, and I can think of a staff member pulled out of retirement whose project might make for a nice landing spot for northern magickers, rather than the same six or eight quitsafe locations that you seem to (surprise) find rogue casters remaining near.

Quote from: "LoD"
There is no "magicker hideout" or "magicker haven" that they can choose to dwell within and socialize with their peers, build a home, have a job, etc...

Of course, if it was a 'hideout', most people wouldn't know about it by it's very nature of being a secret.  So maybe there is, and you don't know about it!  Of course, by the fact you see a problem leads one to believe that it's not there.

What I would like to see is a list of things that can be done with rogue magickers.. For now, all I can see is once you become rogue, and you are a known magicker who won't be able to socialize with most of the rest of the playerbase, because only Red Storm might tolerate you, there doesn't seem to be much left except for:

1) Retiring

2) Become as powerful as you can be, and go the raider's way until you die.

Sure, that might be stretching it, but really.. You might try and get a few more magickers with you, and form some sort of magicker tribe, but magickers are quick to kill other magickers.. And even if you did manage to get said group together.. What kind of pacific plots could you come up with?

Not everyone enjoys playing in Allanak.. As much as I keep trying, I don't. So I would certainly not want to be a gemmer.. But on the other hand, I don't want to spend my hours of playtime 'hiding and spooking' players just because I want to become more powerful (which sounds horribly boring and pointless if you don't have any long term goals with said powers) as a magicker and I don't have much other choices but to hide and cast spells all day long in the middle of nowhere..

Intrepid has very nicely summed up most of my thoughts in response to this post. Rather than quoting everything she said I'll just note that I haven't really noticed a problem.

There are plenty of hideouts and hangouts for magickers to do there shiny cantrip spellcasty explody spell stuff and most don't hold a threat of people running in and discovering you. I think alot of these problems stem from people in the north not fearing magickers and moreless hunting them. Many kudos to Halaster pumping up the magicker population and I'm happy some of the  fear is actually getting across as I've seen in a past few characters. But the people constantly trying to kill you once you've been discovered is driving alot of rogue magickers towards becoming more violent in their dealing with mundanes.

Point being, there is alot of places to tuck yourself away and vanish while you practice your mage craft and that is not a problem. The general problem is characters not RPing fear of the dude who runs faster than flash while spraying flames and lightning and all sorts of liquid death from his eyes.

Quote from: "Malken"What I would like to see is a list of things that can be done with rogue magickers.. For now, all I can see is once you become rogue, and you are a known magicker who won't be able to socialize with most of the rest of the playerbase, because only Red Storm might tolerate you, there doesn't seem to be much left except for

The answer to your question is: Anything.

The visibility of magickers in game and the notion that you have to be primarily a magicker is a failing of the players in question to truly breathe life into their characters.  The possibilities for magicker roles are endless, you just have to find your angle, as I keep saying.  A good place to start is consider the environment your pc is playing in, what race they are, where your pc came from originally and which subclass you chose.  You'd be surprised at just what you can do off the get-go, even if you had zero skills.  Class skills do not equal profession, and that seems to be one of the hurdles the newer mage players are having trouble with.

Your character is something else than a mage.  Your mage abilities are an extra.  Being a rogue mage does not mean you cannot have an angle by which you approach your life.  In fact, I'd say it matters even more to have a profession and an angle that has little or nothing to do with magick.

If you're in a hideout mages are known to gravitate to: Get out.  You're living on borrowed time anyway.  You really should have found someplace else a long time ago, and you're not doing anyone a favor by lingering, except for those people who want to kill you.

And if you've found other mages...organize the ones who will form an alliance with you.  Seriously.  Not everyone will be up to it, but those who like the idea of forming an underground alliance will worship the concept in ways that aren't suitable for print here.

You have not only power in the hands of your pc but potential to create history--even if it's a shadow history that few people will ever know about.

A very telling aspect about playing a non-tribal magicker in armageddon is how people refer to them OOCly.

Those that aren't gemmed are constantly being referenced as "rogue magickers" but many of these ungemmed magickers aren't rogues at all.

I make this point as something to think about.  I believe ICly those in Allanak would refer to ungemmed magickers as rogue and other not-so-flattering terms.  ICly those in Tuluk refer to all magickers as abominations and tainted.  

OOCly they are just magickers.  If we label them rogue magickers when discussing them we are placing an OOC stigma to any and all magickers which is something I don't think is correct.  We, as a community, have to stop thinking of magickers who are in the wilds as rogues.  They aren't necessarily rogues at all.  Many are fugitives from the cities they were born in (and sometimes I wonder about how some of them survive so surprisingly well from the get-go) but they aren't all rogues.

For fun I went through the last page of posts and pulled out what I'm talking about.

Quote from: "LoD"...rogue magickers in the wild...

Quote from: "Marauder Moe"...that rogue magickers live only...

Quote from: "Lazloth"...you seem to (surprise) find rogue casters remaining...

Quote from: "Majikal"...alot of rogue magickers towards...

Quote from: "Malken"...things that can be done with rogue magickers...

Quote from: "Intrepid"Being a rogue mage...

Quote from: "marko"A very telling aspect about playing a non-tribal magicker in armageddon is how people refer to them OOCly.

It depends what people imply or infer from the word "rogue".  In retrospect, the definition of rogue doesn't quite serve the label I meant to attribute the group of which I spoke.  What I meant by "rogue" (whether the definition fits the word or not) was someone who were beholden to none, who walked their own path in hiding from those that would see them enslaved, used, or killed.  They exist in a land of friend or foe, and they are not friend.

It's not that I expect all magick encounters to go poorly.  In fact, that has not always been the case.  I've had good and bad encounters.  I've seen characters that provided an entertaining scene whose antics ranged from careful co-habitation to harmless mischief, while I've encountered others that provided nothing but coded commands whose actions were bent on thievery or murder.

Good or bad, murderous or passive, my contention is that the sum of these magickal interactions are too many if we are to believe magick is so scarce, so misunderstood, and so mysterious a thing in this world.  You could have an assortment of the best played mages in the Known World, but without some measure of control on the frequency of their interaction or displays of power to certain groups of people (i.e. elven and human nomadic tribes, lone travellers, scouts), there will always be an issue when asking some of these people to consider a common spectacle "uncommon".

My request was for suggestions on how the "ungemmed mage" could have a role other than predator or prey.  If they are not bound to the gem of Allanak, then they are hunted by the rest of civilization.  I'd like to see another option that keeps the bulk of them out of tribal homelands and generally out of mundane affairs.  The northern magicker is often forced to choose between their life and perpetuating the stereotype Marko doesn't want to see because they are not granted any middle ground.

The situation gives a northern mundane character very little room to be merciful, kind, or sympathetic to a mage's plight.  And this includeds Tuluki citizens as well as any elven or human tribals that consider magick dangerous to their people, their lands, or their business.  That totals a lot of trouble of any magicker who isn't content with sitting in a cave "surviving" all day.  Is that Armageddon?  I don't know that it is, and I feel like it's cheapening the experiences that everyone could have if ungemmed mages were given more to do.

-LoD

Quote from: "marko"A very telling aspect about playing a non-tribal magicker in armageddon is how people refer to them OOCly.

Actually, marko, I never use the term.  I was only using it for the purposes of this conversation, since so many other people were using it.  I find it to be a matter of forum etiquette to use the terms of those people with whom I'm discussing a topic, basically.

The magicker "situation" to me reeks of the many other distant and not-so distant cycles in player-base playing choices. Remember when every single warrior carried a pair of warhammers? Or whenever you turned around you saw swarms of desert elves in the Sanctuary?

The situation will rectify itself with time, and im not saying this because I feel that this discussion is pointless. I do however agree with LoD that there should be more options for magickers. It would seem to me that it is either too "hard" to come up with an original concept or it is simply too hard to get anywhere codedly or otherwise with a magicker because they die so soon into the game, which leaves people with that initial curiosity as to what the guild is capable of, so they try again.

It's not an OOC stigma at all. A "rogue" is someone who lives outside society's norms. The term fits rogue magickers exactly, as there are exactly two major societies in Zalanthas and neither of them have a place for these people.

I refer to 'rogue' magickers as magickers that have been 'discovered' or those who do not wish to play a gemmer from the start. Those that most remain hidden from society.

Trying to play a normal life once you have been 'discovered' isn't as easy as it may sound. Having a family and a normal job just won't do it anymore. I have absolutly no problems playing a magicker as long as he remains hidden. It is once he has been discovered that the problems of not knowing what to do with it starts..

Perhaps "free" magicker would have a more neutral connotation?  People refer to free muls, and an unowned mul is almost certainly done some rogue actions to become free.


AC

Rogue mul is more appropriate, since they ARE rogue.

Same with magickers, basically.

Personally, I do think something needs to be done about the ridiculous amount of magickers walking around, but I don't think the solution is to accept them as commonplace chums; instead, I think what we need to discuss is how we can reduce their numbers while keeping them a karma-required guild.

Quote from: "Saphreal"Personally, I do think something needs to be done about the ridiculous amount of magickers walking around, but I don't think the solution is to accept them as commonplace chums; instead, I think what we need to discuss is how we can reduce their numbers while keeping them a karma-required guild.

This is where people have a different opinion.  I don't believe there are "ridiculous amounts" of magickers running around.  Such a choice of words if quite misleading.  As of this post, there are 23 players in the game.  2 are magickers.  That doesn't sound like a ridiculous amount of magickers to me, far from it.  The average for a while now has been, at most, 20%.  That's pushing the high mark, but to say it's a "ridiculous amount" is misleading and wrong.

If it's not a problem, then it's not a problem :)

But what if.. When you pick a karma class or race.. You would 'lose' the karma, but slowly regain it through time spent in game?

Say you have 3 karma.. You choose to play a Rukkian.. So you lose 2 karma.. Which brings you back to 1.

After say, 10 days of playtime, you regain 1 karma... Then 10 days later you regain another karma...

This would be cumulative through your different characters.. So if you manage to survive 8 days with a magicker, then die.. 2 days later with a new character you'd regain another karma point..

This doesn't really remove your karma, but it spaces out the amount of magickers one could play during a period of time..

Good.. Bad?

I like the idea, to lose karma and regenerate it in time.  But I think that would be too complicated to pull off.  How would you code that stuff anyway?

I am with Saphreal.  I think there are too many magickers running around freely.  20% of PCs being magickers ARE too much I would think, since the docs say they are very rare in population.  20% is not rare at all.  I would not count more than 5% is rare indeed.

Quote from: "Ghost"I am with Saphreal.  I think there are too many magickers running around freely.  20% of PCs being magickers ARE too much I would think, since the docs say they are very rare in population.  20% is not rare at all.  I would not count more than 5% is rare indeed.

Yeah, the admins must have a very broad perspective on what is rare to consider 20% to be rare.

Quote from: "Ghost"I like the idea, to lose karma and regenerate it in time.  But I think that would be too complicated to pull off.  How would you code that stuff anyway?

Not difficult at all I would think. The same way you go from sated to dehydrated, or the same way you regenerate health over time.. With the in-game timer. I don't know how the code in game is in relation to the player accounts, but if an admin can do something like +karma <character> and it transfers to your account automatically, then something automated would be just as easy.

Quote from: "Malken"But what if.. When you pick a karma class or race.. You would 'lose' the karma, but slowly regain it through time spent in game?

Good.. Bad?

Bad.  I hope this never gets instituted.  Not only are you forcing the imms to watch people constantly in order to fairly dole out lots of karma, there are a lot of players who fall between the cracks of the system that you're dooming to never get karma for any meaningful span of time.

Quote from: "TiberiusAlaric"

Quote from: "Ghost"I am with Saphreal.  I think there are too many magickers running around freely.  20% of PCs being magickers ARE too much I would think, since the docs say they are very rare in population.  20% is not rare at all.  I would not count more than 5% is rare indeed.

Yeah, the admins must have a very broad perspective on what is rare to consider 20% to be rare.

Not at all.  We're taking into account the population of the game world, not just the PC population.  The PC population is not a good sampling of the rest of the world.  Most people dont' play beggars, slaves, average-Joe commoner who is only a stonemason, and so forth.  Why?  Well, that's kind of dull.  People want to play PC's that do more and get out and about, for the most part.  And I don't just mean rangers, but all sorts.

So, while the PC population may get as high as 20% mages, the population of the game world is not 20% mages.

Quote from: "TiberiusAlaric"

Quote from: "Ghost"I am with Saphreal.  I think there are too many magickers running around freely.  20% of PCs being magickers ARE too much I would think, since the docs say they are very rare in population.  20% is not rare at all.  I would not count more than 5% is rare indeed.

Yeah, the admins must have a very broad perspective on what is rare to consider 20% to be rare.

Both of you are wrong.  Sorry.  Wrong.

Halaster said The average for a while now has been, at most, 20%. That's pushing the high mark, but to say it's a "ridiculous amount" is misleading and wrong.0% is High, but not Ridiculous!

He said 1 in 5 is HIGH.  He didn't say 1 in 5 is rare.

Sheesh.  You guys!  *shakes his fist*

I did not say Halaster said it is rare mansa.  But that is something we pull from the docs.  The magickers are supposed to be rare.  And halaster said 20% is acceptable.  My response was regarding docs and Hal together.

And I see Halaster's point now, though.

QuoteBad.  I hope this never gets instituted.  Not only are you forcing the imms to watch people constantly in order to fairly dole out lots of karma, there are a lot of players who fall between the cracks of the system that you're dooming to never get karma for any meaningful span of time.

I don't understand why you would say that.. It wouldn't affect the amount of karma currently given at all.. Nor does it involve any more work for the Imms. Have you read what I wrote? :)

It doesn't affect the amount of karma anyone would receive, that would stay exactly the same as it is right now. You would REGENERATE the amount of karma you've lost by taking a role by a certain amount every x days of playtime you have.

Let me repeat.. Let's say you have 4 karma, and you decide that you want to play a whiran.. After you pick the whiran, you go back to 0 karma, because that option 'costs' 4 karma.

After x amount of playtime on your characters, you would get back 1 karma, automatically.. Then 1 more every set amount of time, until you go back to your maxium amount of karma.

The only thing it would prevent, is, say, for someone to play two whirans in a row.. Unless they manage to stay alive for a very long time.

As karma is a measure of responsibility the staff deems a player to have, putting a timer on karma wouldn't really be justifying that. In any case, if your magicker is a long-lived character, the karma timer wouldn't really effect how many magickers you play in a row, and would only punish those magickers who die early.

Well, chances are that if you manage to play a 40 days magicker, you probably wouldn't want to make another one for a little while..

But if you have at least 2 karma, nothing stops you from playing Ruks and Vivs all the time right now, which I think is part of the problem..

The more players we get, the better they get, the more we get people with 2 karma. Unless you start including mundane 'roles' or 'classes' that require karma, this might just be a growing problem.

I would be curious to know what's the percentage of accounts with at least 2 karma, compared to say, a year or two ago..

Ok, I was mistaken now that you clarified, Malken.  Thank you.  I now disagree for a completely different set of reasons, as Armageddon is harsh enough to lose a pc in the first five hours of game.  That said, I believe that this system you propose is still unfair to the playerbase.

Thank you for clarifying though.  :twisted:

Quote from: "Halaster"

Quote from: "TiberiusAlaric"

Quote from: "Ghost"I am with Saphreal.  I think there are too many magickers running around freely.  20% of PCs being magickers ARE too much I would think, since the docs say they are very rare in population.  20% is not rare at all.  I would not count more than 5% is rare indeed.

Yeah, the admins must have a very broad perspective on what is rare to consider 20% to be rare.

So, while the PC population may get as high as 20% mages, the population of the game world is not 20% mages.

Except the PC population is all that matters since they're the people we interact with, heh. So yeah, I'm not particuarly fond of all the magickers IG, but eh, it doesn't really matter.

Quote from: "Intrepid"That said, I believe that this system you propose is still unfair to the playerbase.

How so?

Quote from: "TiberiusAlaric"

Except the PC population is all that matters since they're the people we interact with, heh. So yeah, I'm not particuarly fond of all the magickers IG, but eh, it doesn't really matter.

This is so not true. This way of thinking will lead you to unrealistic actions and little awareness of your IC surroundings.

Quote from: "Malken"After x amount of playtime on your characters, you would get back 1 karma, automatically.. Then 1 more every set amount of time, until you go back to your maxium amount of karma.

I don't like this option, because it gives the impression that your characters MUST be longlived or you won't be "rewarded."  I have made characters whose fates would surely end in death, because I rolled them for the sole purpose of entertaining players by causing a ruckus.

What if I wanted to make a whiran who discovered her powers in the middle of the Barrel and was forced into a gem by a templar?  What if I then wanted to make an example of her by having her starve to death in the middle of the road rather than be enslaved, thus demonstrating to the population (and playerbase) the horrors of the gem?  It's an interesting (if depressing) concept, but with "spendable" karma such a thing wouldn't be nearly as doable.

Short lived characters can be as interesting as long lived ones, and players shouldn't be expected to think that long lived characters will be rewarded automatically, while short lived concepts will be punished by removal of karma.

It's a brainless system, and while I think there are a few problems with our current one (mainly related to distribution), it's fine as it is.

QuoteI don't like this option, because it gives the impression that your characters MUST be longlived or you won't be "rewarded.

While I don't really have an opinion on the matter one way or the other, I think this is a misunderstanding.

QuoteAfter x amount of playtime on your characters, you would get back 1 karma, automatically.

I do not think he means you have to have a 10 day character before you get your spendable karma back. You could have a 3 day character, a 6 day character, and a couple of 12 hour characters.

Disclaimer: The numbers here are for example only.

I'll pull a number out of the sky and say 30% of all PC:s are fighters, hunters, the sort. I don't think 30% of the virtual population are fighters, hunters, the sort. I certainly don't think 2% try to make their living as assassins, 60% live in Tuluk or 15% are House Guards. But sometimes this is how the percentages are for PC:s.

Yet it's so damn jarring when it comes to magickers because I and others desperately hold on to the notion of gritty low-fantasy. I would like to see magickers in single-digit percentages, and think the way to do it is to move them up the karma tree. Krath knows even many of us with two or three karma are crappy roleplayers. Put a higher standard on playing magicker, make them more rare.

QuoteI do not think he means you have to have a 10 day character before you get your spendable karma back. You could have a 3 day character, a 6 day character, and a couple of 12 hour characters.

Exactly.. You wouldn't need to have to play a character for 40 days to have your karma back, just that you'd have to play a total time of 40 days, no matter how many characters you play.

And yes, the numbers are just for example.. It could be 1 karma back after every 5 days of playtime just as well.. And maybe even add a 'safe zone' in that.. No karma loss for the first 24 hours of your character's life.

Naw, it's fine the way it is. I don't have a problem with the way things are currently and I think that the karma system works well. I see no reason to change it because a few people want to see some karma options even more limited than they already are.

What to keep in mind is also the circumstances of the game that is having players more interested in playing a magicker than a mundane. Also, there might always have been what you may consider a large amount of player magickers IG, just the circumstances havn't brought them out into the open to public view and knowledge.

The war currently going on is bringing alot of magickers together, which may be a large reason players are feeling there is too many magickers IG.

Similary with half-elves and tribals, the amount of magickers IG at a time is also a cycle. Give it a few weeks or months and there'll be more of another kind of guild/race than usual, at least from my perspective.

Also to keep in mind is the fact that there is an elementalist quarters in allanak. Magickers, though they are a small percent of the population of the world, if brought together can make a fair sized portion. The same goes with pc magickers. When several magickers are brought together, it may appear there is an excess of them. It just depends from what perspective and location you are.

The main factor of karma really does seem to be number of years playing. Those players who have been a member of the community for a long time typically have higher amounts of karma.

As Arm gets older, you have more players with more karma and a larger percentage of the overall population with two or more points.

It would be nice, really nice, if those older players who play nothing but magickers would lay off and let things settle down a bit.

I don't have any real problem with the karma system. I like it. But there is absolutely nothing mysterious about magickers. There's plenty of mystery in the magic system, but the characters themselves are so wide-spread and so pervasive that it feels more overdone than anything else.

Quote from: "Cale_Knight"The main factor of karma really does seem to be number of years playing. Those players who have been a member of the community for a long time typically have higher amounts of karma.

As Arm gets older, you have more players with more karma and a larger percentage of the overall population with two or more points.

It would be nice, really nice, if those older players who play nothing but magickers would lay off and let things settle down a bit.

I don't have any real problem with the karma system. I like it. But there is absolutely nothing mysterious about magickers. There's plenty of mystery in the magic system, but the characters themselves are so wide-spread and so pervasive that it feels more overdone than anything else.

The only real solution to this is to recruit more players who would start with 0 karma and therefore refresh the ranks of mundanes.  That said many players want to play magickers and with special apps can play them quite often though it is more controlled than players who just have karma.  I would actually propose having a time limit (4-6 months) on special app characters like there is one on getting account notes.  That might make the system more fair and balance out a few of the magicker PCs of people who don't have the karma but frequently apply for magicker special apps.

The best solution that I see though is to increase the number of people playing mundane PCs.  A part of that is to not stop recruiting but another important part is to make mundanes interesting to play.  Rejuvenate the Byn, enforce magicker rivalry with Noble Houses other than Oash and make them a focus of plots, lessen the influence of organized magickers in the wilds.  The revamp of the Northern nobility could really be a step in the right direction but just promoting interesting non-magicker options will really help.  One part of the problem I see from a limited vantage point is that magicker PCs are in a very amazing, very powerful position right now throughout the gameworld and are thereby really interesting to play.  Make mundanes just as interesting and/or reduce the amount of action occuring for magicker PCs and fewer people will play them.

People flock to what's fun and mages have skills that are really fun to play with.  When other factors in the gameworld come together to make the role more interesting it's only natural that more people will play them.  I still say this problem is blown out of proportion though.

As for the last comment of Mr. Knight's, magickers should be mysterious in the wilds.  In Allanak they shouldn't really be that mysterious, their presence is unwanted but it isn't a mystical experience to see a gemmer walking down the street.  That said if you're constantly seeing magickers in the wilds think long and hard about WHERE you are seeing those magickers.  There may be a reason they collect there and that may be a damn good reason for you not to go anywhere near that area.  RP your characters fears right and that cave to the northwest is no longer just a cave 5 w and 3 n of the gates but a haunted pit of vile magicks.

Edit:  Clearly I never proofread

Quote from: "Ghost"

Quote from: "Intrepid"That said, I believe that this system you propose is still unfair to the playerbase.

How so?

I know of a number of individuals, who, while not numerous, do happen to be very good roleplayers and have a nasty habit of dying just as magicker pcs.  These players do not play mages solely, but they would be punished by this system.

On the other hand, with this system, you're guaranteeing that I could abuse it just because I play nothing but long-lived pcs; I could make magicker after magicker and just make sure that each lives beyond the requisite time stated.

Don't get me wrong, I don't advocate someone playing nothing but magickers--however, blanket rules like this one hurt a larger number than you think and still will not provide a solution.

Quote from: "jhunter"

Quote from: "TiberiusAlaric"

This is so not true. This way of thinking will lead you to unrealistic actions and little awareness of your IC surroundings.

No, it will lead me to believe that magickers are indeed a rare breed in the world. By seeing a magicker on every street corner, it really messes with your immersion, which is what leads to 'little awareness of your IC surroundings.'  :P

I believe the idea was that the timer would start upon your next mundane character, rather than counting the time played a magicker, which would defeat system.

Personally, I think there is nothing wrong with limiting the number of magickers one can play in a row. I don't necessarily think a system like this is the answer, but I do think that there is something to be said about playing magicker after magicker.

Quote from: "TiberiusAlaric"

Quote from: "jhunter"

Quote from: "TiberiusAlaric"

This is so not true. This way of thinking will lead you to unrealistic actions and little awareness of your IC surroundings.

No, it will lead me to believe that magickers are indeed a rare breed in the world. By seeing a magicker on every street corner, it really messes with your immersion, which is what leads to 'little awareness of your IC surroundings.'  :P

Unless you are living in Allanak, I highly doubt you are "seeing a magicker on every street corner". They -are- a rare breed. Think outside of the box.

Honestly, I feel that alot of people are -greatly- exaggerating the issue. It isn't really -that- bad. If it was, I would also be experiencing the things that some of you are saying you have. As it stands, I have not even encountered this in any way at all.

Quote from: "TiberiusAlaric"

Quote from: "jhunter"

Quote from: "TiberiusAlaric"

This is so not true. This way of thinking will lead you to unrealistic actions and little awareness of your IC surroundings.

No, it will lead me to believe that magickers are indeed a rare breed in the world. By seeing a magicker on every street corner, it really messes with your immersion, which is what leads to 'little awareness of your IC surroundings.'  :P

They are a 'rare breed', but when they congregate such as the allanaki elementalist quarters, they do not appear so. By not taking account of the NPC populace, you are actually doing the exact opposite of what you propose you are doing.

Aside from that, do not limit yourself in your perspective, as there are many aspects of the game that may not be what you believe so, despite what you percieve.

Quote from: "jhunter"

Unless you are living in Allanak, I highly doubt you are "seeing a magicker on every street corner". They -are- a rare breed. Think outside of the box.

Honestly, I feel that alot of people are -greatly- exaggerating the issue. It isn't really -that- bad. If it was, I would also be experiencing the things that some of you are saying you have. As it stands, I have not even encountered this in any way at all.

That's really illogical given the explanation for magickers. I shouldn't see one so much, that's just it. There should be no if, ands, or buts when it comes to it, but apparently, I have to "think outside of the box" to get something that is explicitly stated as being true.

I remember when I first logged into the game, I saw three gemmed characters just hanging out in a bar and no one else. I mean, what kind of impression is a person supposed to get about a game when one of the most 'rare' aspects of it is so blatant and obvious?

Quote from: "Malken"And yes, the numbers are just for example.. It could be 1 karma back after every 5 days of playtime just as well.. And maybe even add a 'safe zone' in that.. No karma loss for the first 24 hours of your character's life.

Karma is traditionally assumed to represent a gauge of trust the staff has in a given player:  a subjective measurement of responsibility, maturity, game knowledge, consistency.  There are numerous threads on the gdb about when/how/why karma is distributed (Xygax has some [older] summary discussion linked here.)  What is being kicked around in these recent posts (and this has come up before) is a notion of applying that measure as a chargen currency, and the proposal fails for numerous reasons [some already discussed, some I would attribute to our fairly large playerbase, to our erratic players, etc].

I find it odd that I seem to be the only one disturbed that 85% of the playerbase [at whatever point Halaster or Nusku (think it was this thread, could be wrong) sampled] played ranger, and people are bent out of shape that at peak 20% of the players online were magickers.

That said, I dislike the majority of ideas that are being offered as solutions to a "problem" that not everyone sees.

Quote from: "TiberiusAlaric"

Quote from: "jhunter"

Unless you are living in Allanak, I highly doubt you are "seeing a magicker on every street corner". They -are- a rare breed. Think outside of the box.

Honestly, I feel that alot of people are -greatly- exaggerating the issue. It isn't really -that- bad. If it was, I would also be experiencing the things that some of you are saying you have. As it stands, I have not even encountered this in any way at all.

That's really illogical given the explanation for magickers. I shouldn't see one so much, that's just it. There should be no if, ands, or buts when it comes to it, but apparently, I have to "think outside of the box" to get something that is explicitly stated as being true.

I remember when I first logged into the game, I saw three gemmed characters just hanging out in a bar and no one else. I mean, what kind of impression is a person supposed to get about a game when one of the most 'rare' aspects of it is so blatant and obvious?

But that's just it. Your character did -not- only see three gemmed magickers.  You are discounting the npc and vnpc world where you should -not-. And plain and simple, living in Allanak, unless you are living in a hole (and even then maybe) you -will- see magickers. You're character is -not- seeing -most- of the population as magickers -you-  the player are.

Quote from: "Forty Winks"
By not taking account of the NPC populace, you are actually doing the exact opposite of what you propose you are doing.

That's really a poor explanation for the magicker problem because I do take into account the VNPC population, but what does that matter when you have to interact with the magickers in a signifigant way that you do not have to with VNPCs? It doesn't, it is simply a poor excuse for something that's become grossly abused, at least I consider it to be.

Quote from: "jhunter"
But that's just it. Your character did -not- only see three gemmed magickers.  You are discounting the npc and vnpc world where you should -not-. And plain and simple, living in Allanak, unless you are living in a hole (and even then maybe) you -will- see magickers. You're character is -not- seeing -most- of the population as magickers -you-  the player are.

Okay, now this is just beginning to piss me off. That is the most illogical explanation for a grossly abused system that drastically changes the immersion of the game.  :evil:

Quote from: "TiberiusAlaric"

Quote from: "jhunter"

Unless you are living in Allanak, I highly doubt you are "seeing a magicker on every street corner". They -are- a rare breed. Think outside of the box.

Honestly, I feel that alot of people are -greatly- exaggerating the issue. It isn't really -that- bad. If it was, I would also be experiencing the things that some of you are saying you have. As it stands, I have not even encountered this in any way at all.

That's really illogical given the explanation for magickers. I shouldn't see one so much, that's just it. There should be no if, ands, or buts when it comes to it, but apparently, I have to "think outside of the box" to get something that is explicitly stated as being true.

I remember when I first logged into the game, I saw three gemmed characters just hanging out in a bar and no one else. I mean, what kind of impression is a person supposed to get about a game when one of the most 'rare' aspects of it is so blatant and obvious?

You forget about the elementalist quarter. There are also a few threads about gemmed magickers and places they hang out along with reasons. If you want to see a magicker, just to the elementalist quarters. It shouldn't be that surprising...though I don't advise going there just to see one.  :wink:

Quote from: "TiberiusAlaric"

Quote from: "jhunter"
But that's just it. Your character did -not- only see three gemmed magickers.  You are discounting the npc and vnpc world where you should -not-. And plain and simple, living in Allanak, unless you are living in a hole (and even then maybe) you -will- see magickers. You're character is -not- seeing -most- of the population as magickers -you-  the player are.

Okay, now this is just beginning to piss me off. That is the most illogical explanation for a grossly abused system that drastically changes the immersion of the game.  :evil:

There is nothing illogical about it. The vnpc and npc population count in -all- things IC. They -are- part of the gameworld. What exactly is "grossly abused"? I don't see anything getting abused here. If you cannot take into account the vnpc and the npc population around your pc as well, then you are not seeing the IC world as it really is. You are percieving the IC world through OOC glasses.

Quote from: "Spyguy"That said if you're constantly seeing magickers in the wilds think long and hard about WHERE you are seeing those magickers. There may be a reason they collect there and that may be a damn good reason for you not to go anywhere near that area. RP your characters fears right and that cave to the northwest is no longer just a cave 5 w and 3 n of the gates but a haunted pit of vile magicks.

So true.

The vast majority of vnpc magickers are in the elementalists quarter (not 100% on that, but that's what I'm led to believe.)  I don't think the majority of them leave, either.

This thread will hopefully stop circling the drain soon.

If it doesn't, I'll lock it tomorrow.

-- X

Quote from: "TiberiusAlaric"

I remember when I first logged into the game, I saw three gemmed characters just hanging out in a bar and no one else. I mean, what kind of impression is a person supposed to get about a game when one of the most 'rare' aspects of it is so blatant and obvious?

Would it have been better to go into the bar and see no PCs at all?

Even you don't like so many people playing elementalists, desert elves, half-elves, independents or rangers, it would be a mistake to assume that if you forbade people from playing the roles you dislike that they would start playing roles you approve of.  Those three players weren't playing to impress you, and giving them a narrower selection of roles couldn't force them to play the roles that you would like them to play.

Quote from: "bloodfromstone"

QuoteI don't like this option, because it gives the impression that your characters MUST be longlived or you won't be "rewarded.

While I don't really have an opinion on the matter one way or the other, I think this is a misunderstanding.

QuoteAfter x amount of playtime on your characters, you would get back 1 karma, automatically.

I do not think he means you have to have a 10 day character before you get your spendable karma back. You could have a 3 day character, a 6 day character, and a couple of 12 hour characters.

Disclaimer: The numbers here are for example only.

This would certainly make apartments more popular.   :roll:   Logging out gets penalized, so just go to a safe room and go AFK instead.  Everyone loves it when the taverns are full of AFKers!   A system that rewards AFK and penalizes quitting is inherently flawed.  

It would also be grossly unfair to players that can only play 10-15 hours a week, but are engaged and attentive for the entire time.  Players that are able to log in from work can easily get 40+ hours per week even if they are only engaged and attentive for a few hours of that time.  


* * *


An option that seems more fair is to have the timer work on real time passed, not time played.  Your point of karma regenerates every 10 days passed.  So if you "spent" 3 karma on August 5, you would regenerate 1 point of karma on August 15, and another on August 25, regardless of how much you played during that time.  

This wouldn't encourage AFK behavior, but it would encourage people to just take a break and not log in at all for a few weeks if they want to take a role but need to wait a bit longer for karma to regenerate.  Play a Whiran and die to a mishap after 4 hours?  No biggie, just go buy a copy of Oblivion or Eve Online, and play that until your karma regenerates.  

Any timer program has the potential to reduce the total number of elementalists active at a time, but at the price of also reducing the total number of players active.



The other problem with karma timers is that they don't just effect elementalists.  I don't know if I've ever run into a PC Sorcerer or Psionicist, though I've heard about Sorcerers being active from time to time.  I don't recall even hearing about an active Psionicist, though my only sources of information are here on the GDB or in the game itself, so people that communicate OOCly probably hear about more than I do.  Maybe they are also too common, and I just never run into them.

But what about muls, half-giants and desert elves?  I don't think I've ever heard anyone complain about too many half-giants.  I haven't heard complains about too many muls since the karma scale was revised a few years ago.  A karma regeneration system would also make these characters rarer.  A half-giant has a heck of a time finding a sparring partner as it is, I'd hate to make it even harder on them.


* * *


Sure, elementalists and other supernatural classes probably make up much less than 20% of the virtual population, so PC mages are over-represented.  So are PC Templars, PC nobles, and (Tek help us) PC half-elves.  If you want to keep things proportional half-elves should be, like, 5 karma at least.  In the virtual population half-elves are probably much less common than half-giants, and quite possibly less common than muls since no one is deliberately breeding them.  And we'll all have a lot of fun playing more than half of our playtime as slaves.  

Quote from: "http://www.armageddon.org/intro/allanak.html"Most Allanakis are slaves belonging to the nobles and Templars, and the commoners are usually of the merchant class or soldiers in Tektolnes' army. The rest of the population earn their living in less honest ways.

The PC population does not reflect the virtual population.  It isn't going to.



Angela Christine

AC summed up a lot of what this debate has become pretty well.  GDB kudos.

What triggered this whole discussion?

Tuluk and Allanak fight.

Allanaki templars round up every magicker they can and transport them to the war.

People in the camp have to live side-by-side with magickers and even work with them.

Tulukis have to face magicker opponents.

People complain that magickers abound.

Is this last point really fair?

That did not trigger the discussion.  What triggered this discussion is, there are too many magickers on the loose.

I would be in favor of seeing less magickers if they were given more power at the start. I'd actually be in favor of moving muls/half-giants down a few pegs, moving magickers up, and replacing the desert-elf option with magicker.

It's just a fluctuation in the playerbase. Eventually, it'll go away and even itself out.

Quote from: "Ghost"What triggered this discussion is, there are too many magickers on the loose.

Quote from: "Angela Christine"
The PC population does not reflect the virtual population.  It isn't going to.

Theres nothing wrong with the population of the magickers. There are tons of virtual magickers.

:lol: I predict the next post like this will be "Too many halflings" :lol:

Quote from: "Cegar"I would be in favor of seeing less magickers if they were given more power at the start. I'd actually be in favor of moving muls/half-giants down a few pegs, moving magickers up, and replacing the desert-elf option with magicker.

Muls were moved up in karma years ago because, in part, of what is happening now with magickers.  Several people attained mul karma, fell in love with the power of the class, and began to make mul after mul.  The real issue came into play when the majority of these players elected to play "escaped" muls rather than slaves, which are much more rare.

Each of the karma guilds has certain limitations that help keep the world balanced.  Not balanced in a X = Y way, but in a X * 50 = Y * 5 way.  Muls are controlled and kept balanced by the fact that every single one is brought up in captivity and a slave.  Half-giants are limited by their culture; kind, curious, and dim witted.  They suffer from slow skill progression and difficulty fitting into any of the clan models for anything other than a very niche role (e.g. guard)

Rogue magickers, meaning those that are on the loose running the wilds of the northlands, grasslands, tablelands, and other lands are the choice presently up for discussion.  I'd like to be able to follow the documentation and treat magick as a rare and wondrous thing on the world, but the more people that gain magicker karma, the more magickers are likely going to be in the game at any one given time.  Because of this, the idea that this "cycle" or "trend" will end probably is less applicable to the current situation than for rangers, half-elves, warriors, or any of the mundane classes that have always been a choice of the masses.

What I'd like to see is a system of controls in place for rogue mages outside of the city.  Muls and Half-Giants who are not magickers are forced to interact with at least their environment for food, water, and shelter.  They stand a higher chance of being witnessed by passerbys, tribals, travellers, and other folks.  They're potentially as great a threat "out of the box" as a medium level mage, but they don't scale the same.  And any skill advancement is going to require some obvious exposure to the gameworld.

Mages can (and many likely do) sit in a chamber somewhere they consider safe and gain their power without any interaction whatsoever.  The only thing they need to become extremely powerful is food, water, and time.  No other class in the game can accomplish this task, and for that to be true of the most potentially powerful classes in the game is unfortunate.

Suggestion[/u]

I don't think changing karma or placing hard caps on magicker numbers is the answer, but addressing the model of the mage.  I'd suggest something along the following:

:arrow: Magickers would begin with the first/second tier of spells.
:arrow: Future spells would need to be taught by other magickers (NPC or PC).

This would accomplish a few things:

:arrow: Magickers could no longer sit in a room and become one of the most powerful beings on the planet with nearly 0 interaction.

If people knew they wouldn't be able to improve unless they found another mage more powerful than themselves from whom to learn, they might consider mundane classes more appealing.  I imagine we'd have a lot less "rogue" magickers because some semblance of a mage community would become a requirement for higher level skill progression.

:arrow: Magickers would have to interact to increase power.

The world would have more of a chance to witness a magicker's desire for power and respond accordingly.  A few people have mentioned that magickers aren't necessarily the trouble, but rather the vast amount of power that can be easily attained.  Interaction gives the playerbase a chance (at least) to witness this mage at a stage before they are completely comfortable handling most mundane threats.  It also creates a set of controls in game for magickers, and a whole layer of possible interaction within the gameworld.

:arrow: Magicker distribution would be more realistic.

Mage communities would be more normal, and powerful mages would be given more responsibility because they would have access to that power.  This would likely encourage more magickers to join, or at least communicate, with other mage groups in their attempt to further their learning.  Rogue magickers would really have a tough time learning or progressing because of a lack of teachers.  This would give them a purpose and a desire to follow leads on where such a person could be found, creating interesting events and more control over their presence away from these communities (not just Allanak).

If we really[/i] want to see magick as a rare and mysterious thing, then start with the magickers.  Make it rare and mysterious to them as well, and that will trickle down into the rest of the game.

-LoD

What happens when you:

Play off peak
Are one of the only mages around
Don't find anyone more powerful than you

The list goes on - this might be nice for sorcerers, but the same problems remain there as well, only exemplified.  A setup like that could fast create a total vaccum of magick users, which might make you (LOD) happy, but some of us don't mind seeing magick in Armageddon at all.

Magick is what created/destroyed Zalanthas, it's always been present.  "Low" fantasy doesn't mean no or little magick, as has been stated before.  I sometimes feel like if the "MAKE IT HARDER, MAKE IT HARSHER" crowd had their way, we would all be playing minigames and hardly interacting with each other at all.  Now, this might seem to contradict with my disagreement of the above post, but actually - my problem with the above post is that there are too many ways for it to be frustratingly impossible to persue your goals with your character due to largely OOC constraints.

I see this trend a lot on the GDB - someone doesn't like a certain race or guild (half-elves, thieves, mages) and wants to restrict them so they're around less.  The simple fact of the matter is that people will play what they are attracted to, and while I agree that being flexible in your choices is a good thing, if playing a mage is what you have the most fun with and do best at, then I am not going to get my pants all in a bunch because you're having fun playing a character in this GAME.

Hell, the role of a gemmed elementalist when there isn't a war on is one of the most restricted, boring, and challenging roles I have ever had the displeasure of chewing my way through.  I am a self-motivated player that normally has absolutely no trouble entertaining myself and others, but the role of a gemmed is something I never intend to suffer through again unless there are some noticeable changes in the infrastructure of the way Elementalists are treated in Allanak.

I absolutely do not blame people for making and playing a bunch of gemmed mages when there is actually something for them to do (other than become an Oashi's pet).  The restriction of the gemmed role is also a large part of why people play so many rogue mages.  I absolutely do not blame people for persuing the rogue mage role, because of the restriction and frequent boredom of the gemmed role.

If there was a true culture in the Elementalist's quarter (i.e. a tavern, enough shops so that you could live in it without having to leave) then perhaps people would get what they want - Elementalists who never leave the Quarter.   What else would we get?  An entire segment of the playerbase that is, for the most part, totally isolated from the rest.

That's just not fun in a game.

Quote from: "Delirium"I see this trend a lot on the GDB - someone doesn't like a certain race or guild (half-elves, thieves, mages) and wants to restrict them so they're around less.

I don't want magickers to be less.  I don't want them to be so restricted that people don't want to play one, but I do want them to be restricted enough so that their role choices more closely reflect a world in which magick is "...mysterious and very rare..."

I don't find it realistic that so many rogue mages:

a) Survive the initial "discovery" of their talents.
b) Survive the reaction of their civilization.
c) Survive the life of a wanted man, barely able to defend themselves.
d) Are able to amass power with absolutely NO interaction.

Rogue magickers seem to exist more out of OOC wants/desires than an IC situation. The players don't want to be required to cast in a temple.  They don't want to be forced to wear a gem.  They don't want to be watched over by a templar.  They don't want any controlling factors or restrictions to their gameplay.  And I just find that to be an extremely abusive situation considering the sheer amount of power they can wield.

All I am asking is that some restriction or set of controls be added to the equation of the free/rogue mage.  Why should ANY class be able to go from zero to hero without ever being in the same room as another person?  In my opinion, it's a broken model and unless someone can provide me with a good arguement why the most powerful classes in the game have the easiest paths to power, then I'll continue to debate it.

Because people want to have fun isn't a valid arguement for me.  Of course it's fun to throw around magick.  Of course it's fun to giggle at someone reacting to your invisible presence, or bathe someone in magickal flame, or travel between points of the Known World in a manner of seconds, but if there's no real effort involved in attaining that power, then why should the player respect it?  If they die, they can just submit a new application, wait a few weeks and SHA-BAM, we're right back where we started and no one's the wiser.

I'd like to see high level magick more difficult to attain, and I think that requiring SOME form of interaction on behalf of the mage population to achieve it is a reasonable topic for debate.

-LoD

QuoteAll I am asking is that some restriction or set of controls be added to the equation of the free/rogue mage.  Why should ANY class be able to go from zero to hero without ever being in the same room as another person?  In my opinion, it's a broken model and unless someone can provide me with a good arguement why the most powerful classes in the game have the easiest paths to power, then I'll continue to debate it.

You make it sound like this is something we enjoy doing. Let me tell you, there's nothing more boring and that makes me feel 'dirtier' than casting my spells in a room over and over just so I can survive, this goes against everything that we are supposed to do, but it still pretty much the only way to go if you want to survive as a rogue magicker.. But on the other end, I wouldn't want to be stuck with a gemmed role if I wanted to play another magicker, like Delirium, I really really hated it.

Your suggestion is good, in theory, but what happens once the last of the strongest of the magickers dies off? No one gets to advance without the help from a Staff member that passes on the powers to another player?

Quote from: "LoD"Rogue magickers seem to exist more out of OOC wants/desires than an IC situation. The players don't want to be required to cast in a temple. They don't want to be forced to wear a gem. They don't want to be watched over by a templar. They don't want any controlling factors or restrictions to their gameplay. And I just find that to be an extremely abusive situation considering the sheer amount of power they can wield.

Quote from: "LoD"I don't want them to be so restricted that people don't want to play one, but I do want them to be restricted enough so that their role choices more closely reflect a world in which magick is "...mysterious and very rare..."

But, by reading both things you posted there. It really does sound like you want some people to stop playing them. What's abusive about it? You seem to be saying that: "If they don't want to be stuck in a very restrictive, controlled life of boredom (for the player) then I don't want them playing one."
I personally have founded gemmed to be very restrictive and boring myself. I've found most clans to be the same way. I prefer to play rogue magickers for the same reason I prefer to play independant pcs of any other guild. There's nothing abusive about it, it's what I -enjoy- playing.

And there are controlling factors and restrictions to playing a rogue mage. It's harder to keep yourself alive when you cannot just waltz into a city and purchase what you need. It is difficult to know that -anyone- else who finds out about you will probably report you to those who will try and kill you or foolishly try and do it themselves. It's a life with alot of solitude and danger.

There's always someone complaining about anything other than Race Human /Guild Warrior...etc...

Or complaining about those that don't want to play in the common clans.

I've got a great idea. Play what you want to play and let others play what they want to play so long as it is within the standards of the gameworld. If there was any -real- problem with the mages, I trust the staff would have already done something about it.

I'm curious why you seem to think that there are magickers hiding out in the desert and solo-casting their way to superpowerdom, LoD. Do you have anything to back that idea up?

I'm sure it's possible to spend 20 days in a sekrit hideout doing nothing but casting and avoiding any other players... but does that mean people are doing it? There are plenty of ways to twink and buff up mundane classes too, while avoiding harmful interaction. You can't pick and choose behaviors to limit. If you want to force more interaction on rogue mages, I'll immediately ask that we also force more interaction on halflings and desert elves and all the other iso roles out there.

In general, I'm all for interaction in a roleplaying game. But I like the options mages have right now and don't see a need to change them. I think their role choices are fairly restricted already - you can either be a heavily-restricted gemmer, a sekrit magicker who may not get to cast spells much, or a rogue who pretty much has to avoid both major cities and the largest concentrations of playerbase. And we want to restrict this further?

Maybe we could institute population-caps on certain karma guilds, or the staff could enforce a one-on, one-off rule (must play at least one mundane character after every magicker), but I still don't think the problem here is as big a one as everyone is making it out to be.



edit: Okay... from reading Malken's post I guess some people -do- hide themselves away and solo-cast magick spells.  :roll: But even he acknowledges it feels dirty. If this is the only way rogue mages can survive, then maybe it needs to be addressed - but I still think further restriction on mage roles is unnessecary.

Quoteedit: Okay... from reading Malken's post I guess some people -do- hide themselves away and solo-cast magick spells.  :roll: But even he acknowledges it feels dirty. If this is the only way rogue mages can survive, then maybe it needs to be addressed - but I still think further restriction on mage roles is unnessecary.

By rooms I also meant caves, secret hideouts, etc.. But you have to agree with me that there isn't many other ways if you want to survive as a rogue magicker.

Even by finding a teacher, you'd still have to cast your spells somewhere, somehow..

Quote from: "Jherlen"In general, I'm all for interaction in a roleplaying game. But I like the options mages have right now and don't see a need to change them. I think their role choices are fairly restricted already - you can either be a heavily-restricted gemmer, a sekrit magicker who may not get to cast spells much, or a rogue who pretty much has to avoid both major cities and the largest concentrations of playerbase. And we want to restrict this further?

Yes, or change the documentation to read, "Magick on Armageddon is uncommon, but something most citizens of Allanak and travellers will have to deal with from time to time."

-LoD

Quote from: "LoD"I don't find it realistic that so many rogue mages:

a) Survive the initial "discovery" of their talents.
b) Survive the reaction of their civilization.
c) Survive the life of a wanted man, barely able to defend themselves.
d) Are able to amass power with absolutely NO interaction.

I actually agree with LoD on these points.  And I also like the idea of learning  magick by teaching alone.

Quote from: "Malken"Your suggestion is good, in theory, but what happens once the last of the strongest of the magickers dies off?

This can be fixed with the idea, nil casting is taken off the chart, and you can only rise in power much slower if you are doing it on your own.  So the better idea would be to look for a teacher, because it does not work good otherwise.

A different idea would be, changing the karma tree.  Add the option of starting off with the gem, and that you could play with the current karma tree.  But how about, if you want to play ungemmed,
(For ungemmed magickers)
Rukkian/Vivaduan= 5 karma.
Whiran/krathian= 6 karma.
Elkran/Drovian=7 karma.
Nilazi=8 karma.  (They do not seem to be much easier than a sorcerer)


OR you could special app for a rogue magicker.

Quote from: "Ghost"A different idea would be, changing the karma tree.  Add the option of starting off with the gem, and that you could play with the current karma tree.  But how about, if you want to play ungemmed,
(For ungemmed magickers)
Rukkian/Vivaduan= 5 karma.
Whiran/krathian= 6 karma.
Elkran/Drovian=7 karma.
Nilazi=8 karma.  (They do not seem to be much easier than a sorcerer)


OR you could special app for a rogue magicker.

I think this might be the best idea in this thread.

You'd need to couple it with some redevelopments in the gemmer quarter, since you'd likely have far more gemmers - I'd like to see something along the lines of what Delerium posted.

But yeah. Making ungemmed mages higher karma, + more depth to mage quarter in Allanak = good solution.

But what keeps a gemmed magicker to just becoming a rogue one after a while?

If there's something I don't know ICly about gems, that could prevent them from turning rogue and vanishing in the wild, just say so and I'll just nod in approval to the idea :)

Quote from: "Malken"But what keeps a gemmed magicker to just becoming a rogue one after a while?

There is enough code and un-coded disadvantage to this to make it less than worth-while.  Leave it at that.

-- X

Quote from: "LoD"Yes, or change the documentation to read, "Magick on Armageddon is uncommon, but something most citizens of Allanak and travellers will have to deal with from time to time."

/agree with this. Magick is so common that even a mundane, Tuluki, city-dwelling character is likely going to deal with it in some respect on every login.

Quote from: "Gimfalisette"

Quote from: "LoD"Yes, or change the documentation to read, "Magick on Armageddon is uncommon, but something most citizens of Allanak and travellers will have to deal with from time to time."

/agree with this. Magick is so common that even a mundane, Tuluki, city-dwelling character is likely going to deal with it in some respect on every login.

Damn, I must be playing in a different Tuluk than those of you in this thread.

Quote from: "Ghost"A different idea would be, changing the karma tree.  Add the option of starting off with the gem, and that you could play with the current karma tree.  But how about, if you want to play ungemmed,
(For ungemmed magickers)
Rukkian/Vivaduan= 5 karma.
Whiran/krathian= 6 karma.
Elkran/Drovian=7 karma.
Nilazi=8 karma.  (They do not seem to be much easier than a sorcerer)


OR you could special app for a rogue magicker.

I also think this is a great solution.  Being gemmed would give new magickers a safer environment in which to learn, and the higher level karma would keep the rogue magicker count down to numbers that are more realistic for an environment that would be inhospitable at every turn to their kind.

-LoD

I'd quit playing magickers if this were implemented. Might even quit playing the game just for the point of the opinions of the few ruining things for the others that don't have a problem with the way things are.

Changing the karma tree in this way won't change anything.  We have already seen that the karma tree does not prevent people from using their options.


Either special apping all magickers, some how "spending" karma when you make a karma character (or maybe some types of karma required character) or the IC learning that LoD suggested are better ideas.

Quote from: "moab"Changing the karma tree in this way won't change anything.  We have already seen that the karma tree does not prevent people from using their options.

I'd actually disagree and say that the number of "freel muls" being played dropped significantly when the karma tree change was made.

-LoD

That IC learning thing is bull. Then it makes it so that it is completely impossible to play a solo mage. You would become completely dependant upon others...one of the things that makes playing a slave character suck ass.

Apparently, LoD and some of the rest of you want -all- mages to be tightly controlled and forced into a form of slavery of some kind. Completely ruining any appeal the guilds have for some of us.

And the changing of the karma tree isn't going to solve anything. Eventually over time we will experience more players with those options again. It's only a quick fix(to what some perceive as some sort of problem), in the long term it won't change anything.

I think the idea of "treeing" ungemmed mages differently in the karma heirarchy has some compelling advantages.  I don't find "if you do that, I'll quit playing them -- or maybe even quit the game!" style ultimatum to be a compelling argument either (in spite of your cool .sig, jhunter ;)).  What is best for the game may well not be what most appeals to every individual player.  I also tend to agree that magicker classes seem to be occurring more frequently.

Part of this, I think, has also been a tendency on the part of us as the staff to be more active in awarding karma (which I think is a good thing), and also an overall improvement in the quality of play.

From what I've seen (we have the tools to watch things like who casts a lot), there isn't a lot of the solo-mage hiding out in the desert and doing nothing but spam-casting type of play going on.  Also, the contention that a Tuluki player is bound to run into a mage on a daily basis seems wildly spurious.  But I also think that we are nearing a point (if we're not already there) where the population of magicker PCs in the game is altering its overall atmosphere.  Part of this is pendulum-swing, of course, and part of it is "Oooh, look how much work the staff is doing on magicky types....  I should play one!" that falls out from the fact that we have recently spent a lot of time coding fixes/improvements to the magick systems.

We as the staff need also to discipline ourselves to avoid RPTs and plotlines driven by magickal entities.  There is plenty of mundane mayhem to be made in our world.  And you as the players should challenge yourselves to try out the more "mundane" roles from time to time, also.  BTW, in this sense, I mean to use the word "mundane" to describe a non-magickal PC, not a boring one.  One of the most interesting and fun PCs I ever played was a pick-pocket beggar.

Hopefully this issue will be a self-policing one.  If you want to see less magick in the world, stop bringing magick into it; create non-magicky PCs.  If you don't want us to impose external limits on magicky PCs, don't make those limits a requirement (not saying they are, yet, but I admit:  my spidey-sense is tingling).

-- X

If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

:arrow: The staff have said repeatedly that the relative numbers of PC mages is not out of control.

:arrow:  Rogue magickers are not running rampant in the wilds.  A couple of months ago, I played a northlands ranger and spent a lot of time in the grasslands and other areas outside Tuluk. Magick is, to me, still a rare and mysterious thing.

:arrow: I have trust in the staff that if they see ungemmed magickers engaging in twinking up skills or other actions inappropriate or harmful to the game that they will make the appropriate remedies.

:arrow: Not everyone dashes off to app a magicker the moment they have magicker karma. I have had magicker karma for over 2 years and have yet to make one. I'm sure I am not alone in this.

Quote from: "Malken"
Your suggestion is good, in theory, but what happens once the last of the strongest of the magickers dies off? No one gets to advance without the help from a Staff member that passes on the powers to another player?

This is an important aspect to consider in a debate like this.  As staff, we have tossed around some ideas, and one of them included mages having to learn magick.  And this was the number one reason we don't want to do that.  Inevitably those "in the know" will die off and we'll be forced to re-introduce the knowledge with NPC's.  Not that that's bad, but it's not a good method to rely on.  Also, who's to say those "in the know" are even going to share their knowledge?  I'd really hate to force players to play a certain way (such as "as a mage you must share your magick!").  It would only make sense for someone with the power to withold it from others.

I do like the idea of magick having to be learned, but in practice it won't work out.  And I'm not just guessing wildly - there are a number of "secrets" in the world that continually get lost as PC's die out and we have to re-introduce them every so often.

And to be honest, the number of players who do play a mage and go sit alone in some hideaway until their spells get really high is quite uncommon.  It happens considerably less than some of you think it does.  I won't say it never happens, but it's very uncommon.  I don't think such a rare occurance warrants any sort of change to be honest.  Instead, as staff we deal with those occurances.

Now, your perspective might be that Joe Mage has been hiding away and doing that, because you don't run into Joe Mage until he's powerful.  Or maybe you did and just didn't know it before.

I'm not saying I totally disagree with all this, but rather the problem is much less severe as it's being made out to be.  At first the idea of making non-gemmed mages require 1 more karma sounded awful, but the more I think about it, the less awful it sounds.  Having said that, the potential for a gemmed mage to sit around alone and powergame their spells is equally present if not moreso.  They have temples to facilitate this, the "rogue" mages at least have to go find something (not that that's hard).  So while the idea has some merit, I don't see how it would change much.  My understanding of this argument is that people are worried about the potential for abuse.  I'm not so worried, because the way it works out is that this abuse happens very uncommonly - and those who abuse the system are dealt with, and if the situation warrants it, their karma is removed.

I wouldn't mind seeing basic mages being raised above 2 karma, but I won't lose any sleep if it stays as it is, either.

Quote from: "jhunter"And the changing of the karma tree isn't going to solve anything. Eventually over time we will experience more players with those options again.

Actually, it is a solution.  5+ karma is not in everyone's pocket.  And you don't get 5+ karma that easily.  First two, even three karma are easy.  Very easy I could say.
I might be wrong, but I do remember Vanth (I guess it was Vanth) pointing out that "Until 5 karma, you can earn by playing.  But going for 5+ you would be more likely to special app first, and prove that you can handle it to get the option of playing permanently (of what you apped)".  As I said, I might remember wrong, but I remember something along these lines.

Also, as has been already pointed out, pulling the mul option to karma 7 had solved the "Too many escaped muls" problem.  So changing the karma tree is a solution.

I'm coming to like the notion of the karma tree change. It does seem the most elegant solution to the problem in the longer term.

I don't think that changing the karma tree just delays the inevitable here - it's my understanding that the staff is much more strict about awarding a 5th+ point of karma than one in the 1-4 range.

Coupled with this, you would absolutely need to give gemmed mages more options: more stuff in their own quarter, possibly some opportunities in the Labyrinth and/or secret societies of shady sewer gemmers. Give them more clans to join, besides just House Oash - I think ale six proposed in a thread a while back to create a clan based around a loose coalition of gemmed mages of all the temples, which could be an interesting thought.

There are, also, many many possibilities for mundane mischief, as Xygax said. You can get a lot of fun out of taking your unit of folks out into the desert for some mission or other - I ran a few of these RPTs in Salarr and you could just as easily do them in Kurac, the Byn, and most noble Houses, without any magickal presence at all. This of course requires people to (gasp!) join clans, though. If the clan population was higher, the mundane PCs would have more to do, encouraging more people to play mundanes in clans, which might lessen the weight of the "too many mages" problem that some people see. Food for thought.

Alternately, we could just change it so that all ungemmed mages require halfling/desert elf blood as a component to cast any spell. I like that solution a lot.  :twisted:

Quote from: "Ghost"That did not trigger the discussion.  What triggered this discussion is, there are too many magickers on the loose.

I believe the perception that there are too many magickers on the loose was greatly enhanced by this war.

Before that, we were largely unseen in our temples in the Elementalist's Quarter.

I don't know how many ungemmed magickers there were, but suddenly the war arises, and this topic takes on real intensity thereafterward. Before that it was a relatively small number of complaints about magickers sitting in taverns.

First let me preface this post by saying - my opinion is not the official view of the staff.  In fact, my opinion is a minority opinion on this subject, but one I have held for some time now.  Again, please do NOT take anything said here as policy or the official staff view.

***************************************



While I do not think that this issue has reached the crisis proportions hinted at in many posts here, I also do not think it is non-existent, as other posts imply.  

We can help as staff by making it more appealing to play a mundane, basic PC.  This is in fact a large part of my motivation for volunteering to staff the Byn.  I am hoping that the changes to the northern structure will help with this as well.  Players like to play what is fun and is involved with frightening and whirlwind plot twists.  The staff is aware of this and I think you'll see more mundane plots in the coming months.

As players, you can help by looking at Armageddon as a communal project to which we all have a responsibility.  Switch it up.  Play a ranger or a tailor or even a street beggar from time to time.  Let yourself enjoy the gritty world as one of its mundane inhabitants.  If you save the karma roles for a special treat for yourself..guess what, they'll seem special.

We do control our own gaming world by how we treat it.   Acting as concerned members of the gaming community, we can bring back some of the sense of mystery and awe that magick use should inspire.  But, to do so those of you who like playing magick users the most have to take responsibility and mix it up with the mundane type roles.  We ask you not to play in the same clan twice in a row.  We ask you not to make the same friends over and over.  I don't think it is too much to ask you to pay attention to the character guild choices that you make and how they fit into the game world as it goes along.

***********************************
Once again - the opinions in this post were my own and do NOT represent the staff as a whole
***********************************

:arrow: The number of PC magickers is not out of control.
 
I agree with this statement.

:arrow: Rogue magickers are not running rampant in the wilds. A couple of months ago, I played a northlands ranger and spent a lot of time in the grasslands and other areas outside Tuluk. Magick is, to me, still a rare and mysterious thing.

I do not agree with this statement. I've had characters off and on in the northern wilderness for the past few years and I think 'Rogue' magickers are running rampant. A character without magical ability (known to be massively inferior to one with magick) isn't going to be able to reasonably involve themselves with the plot lines of those magical. It's blatantly suicidal and their impact on the event is hardly ever going to be worth the risk. What can actually challenge a magicker's abilities is going to step on a common PC like sand.

I'm totally for these magickers being given more flexible outlets of play so they don't routinely gather to dominate the less sorceror-king protected areas.

Hot Dancer

Quote from: "Hot_Dancer"A character without magical ability (known to be massively inferior to one with magick) isn't going to be able to reasonably involve themselves with the plot lines of those magical. It's blatantly suicidal and their impact on the event is hardly ever going to be worth the risk. What can actually challenge a magicker's abilities is going to step on a common PC like sand.

This is untrue.

Magickers have plenty of weaknesses that prevent them from doing many things and need mundane pcs to accomplish these things - which gives the mundane pcs a great deal of plot control and power.

Hot_Dancer, I think you're wrong.  I've played a few magickers, and a lot of them are fairly weak in some ways...you may just be coming across the inordinately powerful, or frequenting the same spots where (as others have said) those magickers are going to go (and you know it) because they need some seclusion in the north to practice, since they start out with very little ability to defend themselves.

Here is the current karma chart, in case anyone isn't sure:

QuoteLevels of karma:
Number  Options
1 karma  desert elf
2 karma  water and stone elementalist
3 karma  half giant
4 karma  wind and fire elementalist
5 karma  lightning and shadow elementalist
6 karma  void elementalist
7 karma  mul
8 karma  psi and sorcerer

You can only tinker with the karma tree so much before it gets silly.  There has to be something at level 1, something at level 2, something at level 3, and so on.  I suppose you could break up the paired elementalist levels.  If you made it so that there was only one new thing at each level it might look something like:

1. Desert elf
2. Stone elementalist
3. Half-giant
4. water elementalist
5. wind elementalist
6. fire elementalist
7. mul
8. shadow elementalist
9. lightning elementalist
10. void elementalist
11. Psionicist
12. Sorcerer

Or possible oust them from #2 altogether by replacing them with halflings.

1. Desert elf
2. Halfling
3. Half-giant
4. water elementalist
5. Stone elementalist
6. wind elementalist
7. fire elementalist
8. mul
9. shadow elementalist
10. lightning elementalist
11. void elementalist
12. Psionicist
13. Sorcerer

But that would really just delay the problem, in a few more years it would be back.


Any karma tinkering will also have the problem that while it makes the rarest types even more rare, it doesn't make the most common types much rarer.  Are people really having a problem with lightning and void elementalists popping up behind every tree?


Leaving gemmed where they are but moving ungemmed?  I don't know, that seems awkward to me.  Gemmed are in a much better position to spam cast spells to a dangerous level.  

Gemmed are also restricted from assuming (or continuing) peaceful roles as traders, smugglers, hunters and grebbers.  Magick isn't your whole life, it's just a birth defect.  Unless you have displayed magickal talent since childhood you probably had another career, and subguilds represent this somewhat.  Since it is much harder to get work as a mage than the docs would indicate, you have to do something to make money.  But unless you can turn invisible a gemmed can run into trouble even doing very simple things like mining obsidian within a few rooms of Allanak, because the gem as seen as a flashing neon sign that says "I'm a magicker, please kill me!" pointed at your head.  Tuluk is, of course, right out of the question, but so is most of the rest of the world.  It is deliciously ironic that there are magicks that appear to make it easier to travel, but the gem renders it almost impossible to do so.



I've never tried to play an agressive rogue mage myself, but I can see why people do it.  They do it because "agressive rogue mage" is the most defined role available.  What are your options:

1. Oash Pet.  Ok, not just Oash, sometimes the other Houses or a Templar will hire a mage or two.  This apparently involves dressing up in a livery, and then . . . mostly just hanging around.  It ends up looking like a variation on "aide".  The other House employees still don't want much to do with you.  Gemmed.

2.   Sparkly Scavenger.  You make a living foraging for salt or mining obsidian by day, and by night you retreat to your Temple or room to cast until bed time.  Gemmed or ungemmed.


3.  Secret mage/second-rate merchant.  You try to find a role that doesn't require skills, and then sneak off to cast now and then when you get the chance.  Ungemmed.


4.  Aggressive rogue mage.  Basically a variation on "raider".   Wander around, cause trouble, die.  

I think part of the reason that elementalists aren't mysterious and scary is because there is basically nothing for them to do, so they end up milling around and hanging out in taverns.  I don't think we should go back to the bad old days when halfling sorcerers would cast spells in taverns and nobody batted an eye, but I think the social restrictions on known elementalists have gone too far in the other direction.  Not everywhere, but at least in Allanak it would be nice if elementalists (not sorcerers) were tolerated enough that they could get jobs with most of the active clans, jobs as mages, working with the other members of the clan.  There are hundreds, probably thousands of gemmed elementalists in Allanak, they can't all work for Oash and there is no welfare, so where are they working?  I'd like to see professional hunters or mercenaries taking on a stone elementalist to help protect them during a big job, if I was going to hunt mekillots I'd want every advantage I could get.  Who wouldn't want a water elementalist on the payroll to keep the water barrel topped up?  It would be great if there were provisions in Allanak for Elementalists to be productive members of society every day, and not merely kept as the Highlord's reserve troops in case of war or emergency.  


Keep Tuluk a bunch of paranoid magiphobes, but open up Allanak a little.



Angela Christine

I completely agree with Angela Christine.

Quote from: "Angela Christine"If you made it so that there was only one new thing at each level it might look something like:

1. Desert elf
2. Stone elementalist
3. Half-giant
4. water elementalist
5. wind elementalist
6. fire elementalist
7. mul
8. shadow elementalist
9. lightning elementalist
10. void elementalist
11. Psionicist
12. Sorcerer

I think Ghost's suggestion was something more like this:

1 - Desert Elf
2 - Stone and Water Elementalist (Gemmed)
3 - Half Giant
4 - Wind and Fire Elementalist (Gemmed)
5 - Lightning and Shadow Elementalist (Gemmed)
6 - Void, Stone, Water, Wind, Fire, Lightning and Shadow Elementalist (Ungemmed)
7 - Mul
8 - Psi and Sorcerer

If you didn't have 6 karma, you could special app a rogue mage.

The karma tinkering controls the distribution of elementalists in the game with more realism, though I would only advocate such a thing if both the Elemental Quarter and the Gemmed of Allanak were given more consideration and direction.  I've always enjoyed the prospect of each temple having its own mini-culture, and many of the gemmed being used to locate and capture or destroy opposing magickal beings in the rest of the game.

I completely agree with AC's desire to see Gemmed mages able to use their abilities more often in society, especially the helpful abilities.  Merchants Houses, small groups, many people could make great use of an elementalists skills to help and further their work if it was in any way socially acceptable.

-LoD

I, as well agree with AC. Especially the part about the gem being a kill-me sign. It is a bad thing. It isn't a sign that says "don't attack me or I'll post on the GDB that you aren't afraid enough of magickers."  :wink:

Quote from: "LoD"If you didn't have 6 karma, you could special app a rogue mage.

And you roll-up various other (non-Naki/Tuluki) cultures as rogue?   The gemmed become a newbie school for people wanting to explore magick?  I don't think the model Ghost presents does anything other than polarize and segregate first-timers and non-, and that will be a failing.

If the feeling is that the world does not have enough outlet roles for elementalists other than Naki pets or raiders, perhaps helping facilitate that change (ingame), rather than limiting numbers (out of game), makes more sense?

How did I know that all this would end up with 'make mages more accepted now'?

Make that happen IC'ly.  Going against things as they are.  Not ushered in.  Have it make sense.

In Allanak only.  Tuluk would not change.

I, for one, have felt that gemmed need more places in Allanaki culture ever since I tried the role.

Let's not get all reactionary and alarmist here.

Quote from: "AC"Leaving gemmed where they are but moving ungemmed? I don't know, that seems awkward to me. Gemmed are in a much better position to spam cast spells to a dangerous level.

But then, as Xygax pointed out, there are coded ways to control and restrict the use of the spam cast spells.  So it would not be like a child with a nuclear bomb.  

Quote from: "AC"Gemmed are also restricted from assuming (or continuing) peaceful roles as traders, smugglers, hunters and grebbers. Magick isn't your whole life, it's just a birth defect. Unless you have displayed magickal talent since childhood you probably had another career, and subguilds represent this somewhat. Since it is much harder to get work as a mage than the docs would indicate, you have to do something to make money.

Drawing the ungemmed to a higher karma level will increase the number of gemmed.  And thus will increase the interaction in the city among the gemmed.  That would be a first start.
Secondly, consider if the magicker concentration was mostly in  Allanak.  Now it would make sense to put a bar in Elementalist Quarter.  As well as, it would also make sense to be able to find more things to do for gemmed.  There was a time there were like 13 gemmed in Allanak.  I could have sworn like 10 of them had active jobs.  The others, were applying for jobs and were getting it (nearly) before I lost my char and could see what happened.
Also being a gemmed is not always being an aide or a pet.  Gemmed can be spy/assassin/traveler.  I have seen all, though I was not the one wearing the gem.  Sure, the obvious job is Oash, or maybe templarate.  The same way, the obvious job for a ranger is guiding people through the desert, and selling hides.  For a merchant joining Salarr or Kadius, for a shady to join the Guild.

Being shunned from the Houses or public does not mean being alone and having nothing to do.  Gemmed firstly, have templarate, other gemmed, and people somehow mastered (or suppressed) their fear against magick.  That said, gemmed do not have much need for coins anyway.  Without going too much IC details, lets just say some magickers can be self sufficient.
Also saying gemmed do not have anything else other than joining House Oash, or templarate is not a counterpoint, considering muls are restricted to play as a slave (restriction) or stay away from civilisation and in the desert.  Not only that, they also have the restriction of the anger/hatred/mixing feelings.

Anyway... It is getting long, but my point is, drawing the nongemmed karma up in the tree will make the number of gemmed go up.  And it would bring interaction for the gemmed magickers.  It will also lessen the non-gemmed rogue magickers, so seeing an unleashed magicker in the wilds will not be something so common.

Don't become alarmed?  You want to make changes to the culture of the game for purely ooc reasons.

Yes.  Mages are restricted in their roles.  They always have been.  Why do you think so many of them are supposed to end up -evil-?!

I agree with AC about Allanak society having overdeveloped its behavior toward elementalists.  Being a gemmer sucks at the moment, quite frankly.  The funny thing is, there are all these assumptions going around as to how good any magicker has it, so let me see if I can illustrate what being a gemmer is like:

- Make pc, head in.  Stats suck.  Oh well.
- Go to tavern.  Everyone seems nice once they see my newbie clothing.
- Look for templar.  Ask around.  People ask why.  Tell them I'm a mage.
- Flee tavern after numerous death threats.  Help files say tolerance, not homicide.
- Find templar.  Templar gives me shit for existing.  Slaps gem on me.
- Stagger away from templar after being nearly killed.  Hide in temple.
- Oash mage tells me how cool Oash is.  Finally, a bone!  Try to join.
- Oash noble is not around.
- No, still not around.
- No, still not around.  Starting sid almost gone.  Should have made Rukkian.
- Nearly die trying to visit the tavern again.  Byn suck.
- Nearly die trying to mine sid...and not because of scrab.  Hunters suck.
- Flee back to city from scrab AND hunters.  Still no sid.  Stats suck too.
- Oash noble gives me shit for not being around, despite never having logged out.
- Oash noble will not hire me because I may be a half-elf.  Flee from other mages.
- Find templar and beg for food.  Templar laughs in my face.
- Find another templar and beg for food.  Templars laughs and gives me food.
- Promise to give templar my first born.
- Other templar is pissed at me and vows revenge because I exist.
- Start planning rogue magicker because Allanaki society is overdone.
- Still cannot find in helpfiles where "tolerance" was confused for "homicide".

As the game matures more people will get karma.  Tinkering with the karma tree simply puts off the need to fix the situation by a year or two years.

I tend to believe that the majority players are honest, mature, and play well.  Because of this they accumulate karma as they play.  So as time marches on - more and more people gain the karma to play magickers.

Out of these people a few will constantly play magicker roles; the majority will give them a try and then alternate between magicker and mundane roles; and a few won't even try a magicker or play one and stop playing them.  Bell curves are fun.  

I think we will see more and more magickers as time progresses if nothing changes - simply because more and more people have the option of playing them.  I don't believe this is a trend that will stop.  

In terms of solutions I'm leaning towards a point-buy system combined with our current karma system.  The karma determines what you can potentially play and the points determine if you can "buy" the role.  Points would accumulate just like karma.  Points would cap out at your karma level (so in essence you are proving that you can play the role each time you make a karma role).

I'm not sure if it is a truly elegant solution though.  I don't like automatic time-based regeneration of karma - in fact, I don't like any automatic system.

Wow, I have to say I think Intrepid's experience of being a gemmed mage is relatively unique.  I have played long-lived gemmed mages in Allanak on a couple of occasions, neither ended up in the employ of Oash, and neither had trouble with funds.  One was a Vivaduan and one was a Krathi.  Also, I found ways in both cases to make myself useful to templars (while occasionally the "uses" weren't probably fun for my PC, the play was fun -- if creepy, occasionally -- for me).

-- X

The one mage I've played was a gemmer (although she didn't start out that way, I was hoping to play an ungemmed rinthi mage and got caught.)

I actually found the role pretty fun - but being a vivaduan may give you more chances for interaction than others. Lots of times I could sit downstairs in the viv temple and people would walk in wanting water, healing, etc. My little rinthi girl who I had intended to keep starving around the poverty line was suddenly making money hand over fist.

Your mileage may vary, though, and one thing I definitely noticed is that when playing a gemmer, your options for employment are basically Oash, or templars. Templars often seemed to want to use primarily Oashi mages anyway... which made things hard for my poor little breed.

I would love to see more options opened up for gemmed mages in Allanak that aren't "Join Oash or become somebody else's pet." Whether or not we tinker with the karma tree, giving gemmers more options might make more people play gemmers, which would help with the "rogue mage" problem if people think there is one.

Quotemight make more people play gemmers,

Please god NO.

Quote from: "Armaddict"
Please god NO.

As opposed to rogues - not a flood of new Magickers.

I...really don't care whether they're rogue or not.

In my opinion...rogue is completely justified.  Hence why the gems exist in the first place.  Allanak allows you to live there, with a gem, so that they can keep tabs and have some control over you, and use you as needed.

Some mages will recognize their 'superiority' and choose not to be such a tool.  They will be a rogue.  They will be evil.

This is all arising because more people want to play accepted mages who can have steady interaction and have fun in the way they do with their mundanes.  But these restrictions are PART of the role of a mage, due to the culture that you now want to change to accomodate.

I want to play a mindbender.  I've even tried to see if there were ways to make it more accepted.  But that's not going to happen, is it?  The same goes for mages.  If you want to interact freely with people and have open choices for what you do...hide it.  This is no different from any other hated role.

Quote from: "Xygax"Wow, I have to say I think Intrepid's experience of being a gemmed mage is relatively unique.  I have played long-lived gemmed mages in Allanak on a couple of occasions, neither ended up in the employ of Oash, and neither had trouble with funds.  One was a Vivaduan and one was a Krathi.  Also, I found ways in both cases to make myself useful to templars (while occasionally the "uses" weren't probably fun for my PC, the play was fun -- if creepy, occasionally -- for me).

You're right.  The above post was more of a synopsis of multiple experiences to get the point across.  However, over half those experiences did happen to my last Vivaduan, and while she was considered useful to the templars, they wanted to use her without any regard for her pocketbook.  And hence, that pc, whose only goal was to get nifty tattoos, was generally alone and mostly without sid.

My main point to all of this is simple: Players overportray the setting.  I understand why, since you have to appear to be playing within the guidelines, and nothing screams this better than overdoing it.  However, the game has suffered for it, in my opinion, because we've done this to the opposite end of extremes from back in the day when we were trying to escape the kank-riding elves.  It's now just as illogical as it was back then, but for the exact opposite situations.

- With every applicable character, there is always someone who is from Allanak unable to resist threatening to kill my magicker pc for just sitting in a tavern.
- With every applicable character, some Oash got his panties in a wad because I either looked like I could have been part elf or I was part elf--even in cases where I didn't approach this individual, I might add.
- With every magicker, Oash or Darth Templar were my only options for work as a gemmer--and neither group could resist acting like asses, quite frankly.

The truth is, LoD is wrong.  You don't make a rogue magicker to avoid interaction with the game.  You make a rogue magicker in order to ensure you can interact with the game without someone thinking it's ok to take a crap on you or just kill you outright because you looked in their general direction.  For most places it's ok, but for Allanak?  Come on, folks.  Let's develop some actual sense of society and ask ourselves why the magicker was even able to make it to the tavern in one piece in the first place; if the npcs aren't going out of their way to threaten a mage, why are you?

Unless this changes, I will be content with playing a rogue magicker every other character.  These experiences are not unique.  It's just that no one is bringing them up.

I wouldn't mind more mages, either of the gemmed or the secret variety. I think those have many more opportunities than the "I am the evil raider rogue mage! RAR!!" variety - though I don't mind any of them if they're played well.

STILL disagree with the idea that making the options higher karma will "delay" the problem. There are always going to be more 2-karma players than 4-6 karma players, as long as the game keeps growing. If we maintain a steady growth rate, then the ratio of people who can play rogue magickers to those who can't will always be smaller if we bump the options higher up the tree.

edit: because I don't feel like posting on top of myself...

Rogue mages do NOT necessarily have to be "evil". Nothing about being an ungemmed mage makes them inherently any more evil than being a gemmed mage (who by the way do not need to be passive and good just because they're gemmed, either.) I don't agree with Armaddict here at all.

As I said...the evil rogue mage is completely IC.

You're just being too concerned with making the mage more playable as a part of the society itself...because you like playing mages.

Like someone who repeatedly plays sorcerers complaining about how he gets hunted down even though he helps people.

The evil rogue mage is completely IC. So is the evil gemmer.
The good gemmer is completely IC. So is the good rogue mage.

Your sorceror analogy doesn't really work. If you're trying to make the claim that mages shouldn't have any opportunities for interaction and should all be pushed away from society... I'm going to disagree with you absolutely and completely. The view that mages can either be tamed, submissive tools of Allanak or evil bogeymen of the deserts seems incredibly narrow.

Quote from: "Armaddict"You're just being too concerned with making the mage more playable as a part of the society itself...because you like playing mages.

Actually, that's wrong, and also a bit offensive.  My favorite and most long-lived characters were all mundane classes.  I have played a total of three (relatively short-lived) mages in three years.

Quote from: "Armaddict"Don't become alarmed?  You want to make changes to the culture of the game for purely ooc reasons.

Sometimes playability trumps "culture".  A lot of people seem fixed on the idea that PCs can do nothing but loathe mages, south or north.  In actuality, mages are supposed to have a viable, if very low, place in Allanaki society.  It would not be much of a stretch at all to open up more and flexible roles for gemmed mages in Allanak.  Meanwhile, from the impression I have gotten, the way people generally act ingame is far more harsh and difficult to deal with than the helpfiles and documentation indicate.

Instead of a nice grey area between "acceptance" and "hatred", you have this sense of "never get along with a mage as a mundane, or you're a bad roleplayer!" going around, with the very rare few who will give you the time of day.  I personally think that's ridiculous, and it doesn't give mages many options other than to be evil.  Forcing nearly all mages into an "evil" mindset is precisely the problem.  You should not have to be a baby-eating, soul-sucking, hate-filled ball of wrath to play a successful mage in Armageddon.

My experience as a gemmed went something like this:

- Get gemmed, work out a schedule of practice and downtime
- Meet a couple other gemmed mages.  Awesome.
- Other mages rarely log in.  Get bullied around by a templar.
- Get bored of the routine of grebbing, casting, and being utterly ignored by mundane PCs.  Being snubbed ICly is fine, having your existance entirely unacknowledged is hell.
- Start seeking a job.  Told to get lost by templar.
- Get offered a job by noble.  Ponder it, then get told they don't want <my mage class>.  Fark.
- Meet a criminal that's actually willing to socialize with me!  Yay!
-  Fuck around with some spells and stumble on Something Cool (tm).
- Get told that succeeding at Something Cool (tm) is actually a bug.  Oops.
- Suffer IC consequences of trying to fuck around with Something Cool (tm) that briefly renews my enjoyment of the character.
- Criminal guy never logs in or is dead.  Damn.
- Get so incredibly bored and starved for interaction that I decide my character is going to strike out for sandier pastures due to IC consequences of Something Cool (tm).
- Driven out of the city by lack of interaction and options, it doesn't take me log to meet my fate at the hands of NPC #98135.
- Say "Damn, that sucked" and roll up a mundane character.
- Start having fun again.


There needs to be more option for interaction and employment for a gemmed mage in Allanak, or the role will continue to be a drag for all but the most dedicated (and lucky enough to actually find a niche or play during a time when there are plenty of other gemmed).  I do not think my experience, or Intrepid's experience, is as rare as a few people seem to think.  As I hopefully illustrated, I did my best to roll with things, create interaction, and find something To Do, but in general, failed miserably.

Yeah, ideally there should be more things for players of mages to do that don't so much involve interaction with non-mages.

-- X

QuoteThe good gemmer is completely IC. So is the good rogue mage.

Yes, but that does not mean that they are recognized as 'good' or going to inevitably become more accepted.

And no, the sorcerer analogy still applies.  The point of is not that mages are like sorcerers.  The point of it is that you are arguing against the way the role is and always has been due to deepset, existing cultural biases.  Just because you -love- the spells, the spell-casting system, and the way things work does not mean we need to make changes so that people can play them more in a setting they can be more comfortable in.

It -is- part of the role.  Play with it, or don't play it, or work with every character to try to change it.  Sometimes...you do well enough to make an impact.  But don't come talking about it on the GDB saying 'this needs to change' just because, as it has always been, you can do things that benefit people and so they -must- see that and start accepting you more.  Don't come and talk about how the role is too restricted and should be changed so that the role becomes more enjoyable for how you want your mage to be able to be played.

Take the role it plays, and play it.

QuoteSometimes playability trumps "culture".

Not so.  Which is why this game is unique from most others.

QuoteYeah, ideally there should be more things for players of mages to do that don't so much involve interaction with non-mages.

I think if they actually stayed in their quarter, in some of the places that have been set up there, and actually worked with other mages to try and have things occur in that quarter...with the current number of mages, there would be plenty to do, talk about, or work on.

Not saying it can't be improved to be even better...but resources are not so scarce right now, it's just that almost all magickers are pushing for 'fitting in' with everyone else rather than grouping together.

Uhh.. Not every rogue magickers go rogue because they want to be evil, far from it..

One of the reason I prefer to play rogue magickers is because I don't want to be trapped in Allanak.

Another reason, its because I don't want to be seen as just a magicker, I want to be able to play other roles as well, such as a merchant, a bard, a con artist, etc..

I have absolutly no interest in being 'evil' and casting my deadly spells on poor rangers and hunters that dare step near my evil cave.

But I have much interest in being able to play a social role, like someone said, to play my magicker the way I play my mundane characters, which is impossible in a way if I'm gemmed.

So, once more, let me repeat this.. Not every ungemmed magickers is out to make your life miserable and kill your characters. Most of the time, we want to be left alone, just as much as you want to be left alone.

Exactly Malken.

That is why it IS IC for people to not be a gemmed magicker in Allanak.  But people go there...because they want the interaction while playing a mage.  But, it seems that now that they have interaction...they now want a certain -kind- of interaction.  And now, when they live in a city where things are available...they want the means provided.  Ignore the fact that mages have lived, breathed, and been successful in allanak forever.  Now that there are so many more being played, we need more jobs available, and more 'fitting in' allowed.

However...from a purely IC standpoint...it seems logical to assume that some...perhaps even a pretty good amount...would rather leave and be a 'rogue magicker' instead of dealing with what they must there, right?

Edited once.

Armaddict:

Read my entire post, please.  

If you want an Armageddon where everyone hates everyone too much to interact, then we definitely want to play two very different Armageddons.  Yes, playability does trump culture, if that culture is one so fueled with racism and hatred that we have to feel like bad roleplayers for ever interacting with (note I did not say "be buddy-buddy with") anyone magickal or otherwise taboo. The current culture IN ALLANAK is not documented to be as intolerant of mages as you seem to claim.

As well, I have never said that mages should be accepted, I said they should have more viable places in Allanaki society.

Please take the time to think through what has been said before knee-jerk responses.

Quote from: "Armaddict"

QuoteYeah, ideally there should be more things for players of mages to do that don't so much involve interaction with non-mages.

I think if they actually stayed in their quarter, in some of the places that have been set up there, and actually worked with other mages to try and have things occur in that quarter...with the current number of mages, there would be plenty to do, talk about, or work on.

Not saying it can't be improved to be even better...but resources are not so scarce right now, it's just that almost all magickers are pushing for 'fitting in' with everyone else rather than grouping together.

The quarter i think could be improved for this, like a drinking place, where is a mage who likes to get drunk suppose to go currently? Yes, prehaps with population can interact but if want to play a drunk magicker as example a bit limited.

Amish Overlord  8)

Quote from: "Armaddict"However...from a purely IC standpoint...it seems logical to assume that some...perhaps even a pretty good amount...would rather leave and be a 'rogue magicker' instead of dealing with what they must there, right?

Actually, I think the lower-risk path is more ICly attractive, personally.  And remaining gemmed and under-the-radar in Allanak is lower risk than being a rogue mage concealing yourself in the wilderness.

-- X

There's a massive amount of weight in this thread from very experienced players saying that mages as they are could be given more options and be made more playable. I have not once seen anyone saying they want mages to be more playable because they love the spell system and want an easier time for their mages. You really are putting words in peoples' mouths to a rather offensive degree, Armaddict.

Mmmkay.

So...Delirium...explain why in a clan I recently played in, I -tried- to hire mages and was told by a clan immortal that such would be degrading to the name of the clan?

This is the attitude in a variety of places.  I'm not overexaggerating...dealing with mages is risky business that most will not deal with.

This is not playability period.  This is not interaction.  This is you wanting to play a certain role without the drawbacks involved.  You are -free- to get all the interaction you like.  You are -free- to try to hide what gives you those drawbacks.  All are fun ways to role-play.

But you can't say 'change this about the game because I don't like how it affects this one type of character I want to play'.  Otherwise this game will have documentation switching around all over whenever there's a gripe about not as much interaction or fun as a role can -potentially- have if it's removed.

QuoteActually, I think the lower-risk path is more ICly attractive, personally. And remaining gemmed and under-the-radar in Allanak is lower risk than being a rogue mage concealing yourself in the wilderness.

Will all of them see it as lower risk?  Will all of them think it's worth it?

Quote from: "Armaddict"Not saying it can't be improved to be even better...but resources are not so scarce right now, it's just that almost all magickers are pushing for 'fitting in' with everyone else rather than grouping together.

You've been making some unfair remarks.  This isn't simply an issue of magicker players OOCly wanting to be in a situation where they "fit in" better, and most of the mages I have watched have been RPing in a manner that suggests they respect the cultural gap that separates them from mundane society.

What I and others (including LoD) are saying here is that we might widen that gap even more by giving mages another direction to go in, giving them goals and conflicts that put them still more at-odds with mundane players, while also providing them more "fun" stuff to do.  If people want to offer suggestions along these lines, those are the suggestions I personally am more interested in seeing implemented (or going off and implementing, myself).

-- X

Quote from: "Armaddict"Will all of them see it as lower risk?  Will all of them think it's worth it?

Certainly not all of them will see it as lower-risk.  Surely even idiots are occasionally born with magickal ability.  The simple fact is, it IS lower-risk from a purely statistical standpoint, both in terms of the VNPC population AND in terms of the PC population.  And yes, most people think not-dying is worth anything and everything, even slavery (which some people have suggested being a gemmed mage is -- that hasn't been my experience).

-- X

QuoteYou really are putting words in peoples' mouths to a rather offensive degree, Armaddict.

Yes, I kind of am.  However...that's because I see people all over saying 'I enjoy playing mages' or 'Mages are awesome, but...' and then they go on to state the things that are -not- fun about a mage.

But...those things are things that have always come alongside playing a mage.  So...I don't think they enjoy playing 'mages' as much as playing 'spellcasters'.

Yes, it's mean, and I'm sorry.  But as has always happened in the past...I'm against these sort of changes that will, in my opinion, quite literally -change- this game from how it's been.  You can say it's for the better...but when you play for seven or eight years with no one having -too- big of a gripe against the mistrust and hatred against a certain role, and then it becomes a suggestion to change or 'loosen' such so that that role can have a more similar-to-a-mundane-character experience while as something completely different...it really grinds my gears (<--YES!  I got to say it.)

QuoteWhat I and others (including LoD) are saying here is that we might widen that gap even more by giving mages another direction to go in, giving them goals and conflicts that put them still more at-odds with mundane players, while also providing them more "fun" stuff to do. If people want to offer suggestions along these lines, those are the suggestions I personally am more interested in seeing implemented (or going off and implementing, myself).

Are you talking about for gemmed mages, though?  In the city goals that put them at odds with mundanes?

I'm probably misunderstanding the statement at this point...but wouldn't that be something that would send templars to constantly quash unruly mages and eventually the goal itself (if it were something quashable like that...once again...I don't think I fully understand what you mean.)

And if you're not talking about making mages more accepted and that such...then I completely misinterpreted and apologize.

But do keep in mind...more employment opportunity by existing houses/groups -is- more tolerance and acceptance.

Quote from: "Xygax"If people want to offer suggestions along these lines, those are the suggestions I personally am more interested in seeing implemented (or going off and implementing, myself).

I think the elemental quarter should expand its internal market with a quitable tavern / den thingie.  I believe that would help the elemental quarter a lot.  

I'm always surprised that the elemental quarter doesn't have more PCs congregating in the little market there but I guess they need a tavern structure to understand that you can go there to hang out and relax.  

Something simple will do just fine.  With that one addition I think the elemental quarter will be granted the opportunity to develop its own culture - and have inner-quarter conflict (one temple versus another temple like say drov vs krath).

Other than that, I think everything is fine for magickers.  Magickers can do anything they want - the problem that I've seen both in the game and while reading these threads is that people tend to define their magick characters as magickers and not people with magickal abilities.  If people could play their characters as characters and not as magickers I think you'll see a lot more enjoyment out of the roles.

As it seems the thread has wandered abit from the original intent, thought I'll try and sum what's been added so far from my perspective.

:arrow: People want to see less magickers, and keep the sense that they are rare. Yet, it's been pointed out that the current amount of magickers, though abit high, is alright with with the staff considering the npc population.
:arrow: The idea of changing the karma tree to have magickers limited to gemmers before going rogue gets introduced, and it seems people like the notion. Reasons likely because it'll make magickers less appealing than mundane, which I don't like the reason of. If there is too much of a race of guild, making the guild/race less appealing will only make Armageddon as a game less appealing to players who might enjoy those roles, which I hope isn't a result anyone would like.
:arrow: The elementalist quarters in Allanak should be improved upon, so that those who are gemmed, or are considering playing a gemmed elementalist, will not be bored out of their minds and play a rogue instead.

Funny thing is, improving the elementalist quarter won't lessen the amount of players who are playing magickers, and may rather result in even more magickers.

My point being, for those people who feel the experience of magickers being rare is being ruined, please consider where your character is, and the circumstances surrounding your mundane character. For those of the south, you as a player should know, despite the magicker population being considerably smaller than the rest of the population of mundanes, once they are all congregated in a quarter, or location, it may seem there are more than the ratio should be. This doesn't mean magickers have suddenly become widespread and a commonplace thing. It only mean where you are currently are is a gathering place for magickers.

Quoteonce they are all congregated in a quarter, or location, it may seem there are more than the ratio should be.

Except that most mundanes would probably not wander there much.  Though it'd be kind of cool to walk in there and see mages you'd never seen everywhere and actually get to marvel at it.

I don't see it currently being a problem but a potential future problem...mundanes are supposed to react a certain way with magickers...most commoners should be shitting their pants when they see one. I'd hate to see the day i enter a tavern with my Ranger and see nothing but magickers at the bar...there is only so much shit his pants can hold.

Thats the difference between rangers and magickers... PCs can't go up to a magicker and say lets go do this without huge ic reasoning like a pc could with a ranger.

That said it would be nice if magickal ability could be used in other ways or clan. I can see two clans hire magickers to some extent...the byn and Kurac (or maybe those clans already do  :wink: ) ...However the biggest problem always comes down to control and guarantee, when it comes to magickers there is none.

For example those crazy rogue magickers usually working from the wilds...there is almost nothing or anybody to stop them from causing trouble. You can't hire templars to help you in the wilds, you can't hire the byn to deal with them, you don't have specialized hunters or outriders. The only way to deal with magickers is to run.

The balance of armageddon wasn't in the classes itself but that fact that were few PC magickers running around so every second person you met didn't automatically have the ability to kill you or force you to RP fear. Thats changing or could very likely change. More people seem to be playing magickers and guess what now they want to be able to RP in more places with them.

Making magickers even more karma restricted sounds silly to me, because that falls way beyond trusting that someone knows how to play magickers or won't abuse the code to a level where only the most perfect of RPing type people may have the skill in a few imms eyes to play a cool class.

The solution? I don't quite know...but their has to be some balance to the game to make it playable. Not nessasarily in the code but possibly a change in the way things are handled. Doesn't mean the world begins to love magickers but maybe the world need regular witch-hunters...paving the way for witch-hunter robins.

Arm:  Again, you have filled my mouth with words that don't follow from my remarks.

a) I don't care whether the mage is gemmed or ungemmed.  They should have magick-y goals beyond just "branch 'assault snake'" (which is a good idea for a spell, isn't it??).

b) I'm not talking about IC employment, I'm talking about goals and tasks that act as catalysts for interaction with the world (whether that interaction be negative or positive, again I don't care -- but I am a big fan of friction)

Right now, I think many mages spend their time engaged in seeking power for power's sake, without any long-term end goal in sight.  A long term end goal (or series of long-term goals) with both coded and RP'd "milestones" would benefit them and benefit the game by keeping them largely out of other players' hair (or actively IN other player's hair, but hopefully with more IC purpose than simply preying on them).

That's a larger project though.  I think it would be interesting to flesh out some simpler systems that keep mages busy with things that non-mages either can't perceive or don't have access to.  There are already magick-y "things" all over the world, but in many respects those things don't actually DO much.  Giving magickers more natural enemies or parasites -- things they can struggle against beyond the realms mundane PCs have access to -- would be tremendously cool, I think.

-- X

I wouldn't suggest ushering in an OOC change for the sake of change.  But I question how much of a change it would be ICly, if they are really supposed to be as isolated as they are now?  Or are PCs applying more stigma than the populace in general, perhaps right now we're all elves riding kanks.

Not to mention that the current situation offers a great opportunity to de-demonize elementalists in Allanak (while simultaneously making them even more hated in Tuluk).  Apparently elementalists are contributing food, water, healing, and offensive capabilities to the war effort.  Do you think Lord Templar Tightass would bother himself to heal you or your buddy?  Not unless you're pretty special, or have an important friend.  But that little water mage did, and it didn't make your dick shrivel up and fall off or anything.   [Note: this paragraph did not refer to any specific PCs, living or dead.  It's a fictional example]

Quote from: "Armaddict"
And no, the sorcerer analogy still applies.  The point of is not that mages are like sorcerers.  The point of it is that you are arguing against the way the role is and always has been due to deepset, existing cultural biases.  

But it hasn't always been that way.  That's the point.  There are players around who can remember when the roles for elementalists weren't nearly as restrictive as they are now.  The helpfiles themselves indicate that there was more acceptance, or was intended to be more acceptance, in the past.

Stone elementalists:

QuoteStone mages may be employed as part of an army or scouting group, for they are well able to weave protective magicks around their companions. Stone mages can also be invaluable as travelling companions because of their abilities to conjure mounts and construct shelters for rests during long journeys. Stone mages are, however, the most druidic of all the mages, and usually come to appreciate solitude and long quiet communes with the earth.

Sun Elementalists:

QuoteMore than any other mage, sun mages are employed for purposes of combat. Although a mage may have certain goals in mind for his/her life, the fact remains that sun mages can do only one thing well, and that is to slay with the heat of the Sun.

Water Elementalists:

QuoteWater mages are highly employable, amongst those who would hire any mage to begin with. As companions on journeys they can be worth incredible sums of money, and as permanent parts of clans or Houses worth even more. Due to the widespread unease generally felt around any mage, however, only large organizations generally will consider hiring a water elementalist.

Wind Elementalists:

QuoteNearly as much as water mages, wind mages are able to sell their spells for a good profit, to those who would hire a mage in the first place. A powerful wind mage can be an absolutely invaluable ally, however, and so they may be sought out to aid in various assassinations, espionage (at which wind mages can be very good), or military operations.

As travelling companions, wind mages may be somewhat undependable-- they will typically become very tired of 'just walking,' and may abandon any party with which they are journeying.

Heck, even Void Elementalists talk about their employability:

QuoteEmployment is only found in some other job, as their abilities aren't generally desired by few but those seeking quick movement of masses of people.

Due to their nature, void elementalists are distrustful of most and so make questionable at best travelling companions.

Contrast that with the file for Sorcerers:

QuoteBecause of their potential power, the Kings of Old, as well as the lords of the city-states of the contemporary world, do not permit sorcerers to exist. All who demonstrate knowledge or use of wizardry are typically killed at the earliest opportunity. Being powerful in the way of psionics, High Templars and the Kings themselves can easily sense a sorcerer's presence if said sorcerers do not properly shield their minds at all times.

Nothing there about Sorcerers getting jobs or whether they good traveling companions.


Elementalists are supposed to be part of society.  They are supposed to get jobs.  They are supposed to be considered as travelling companions.

Sorcerers are supposed to be outsiders.  They don't admit what they are, or get jobs, or offer their services as travelling companions.


Elementalists are not Sorcerers.  There is a difference.



Angela Christine

How about coming up with a list of potential jobs, goals and roles for magicker PC's to slap onto the website? I think that'd be an excellent end statement for this thread.

Hot Dancer

Quote from: "Anonymous"

For example those crazy rogue magickers usually working from the wilds...there is almost nothing or anybody to stop them from causing trouble. You can't hire templars to help you in the wilds, you can't hire the byn to deal with them, you don't have specialized hunters or outriders. The only way to deal with magickers is to run.

Fight fire with fire.  Who are the perfect people to fight rogue elementalists?  Other elementalists.  Particularly if those elementalists are working with skilled swordsmen.  One elementalist alone can't touch a mixed group of elementalists and mundane tough guys.  Undo his enchantments.  Make him visible so the fighters can shoot him.  Knock him out of the air so that the rangers can track him when he tries to run.  
Unmake the bitch.


You can't hire a Templar, but you can hire Elementalists.  You can't hire the Militia, but you can hire the Byn.  If you can somehow convince the Byn to work with your elementalists, then that rogue is toast.



Angela Christine

QuoteArm: Again, you have filled my mouth with words that don't follow from my remarks.

Actually...I just asked you questions and made it known I didn't understand exactly what you meant.

AC:

em·ploy   Audio pronunciation of "employable" ( P )  Pronunciation Key  (m-ploi)
tr.v. em·ployed, em·ploy·ing, em·ploys

  1.
        1. To engage the services of; put to work: agreed to employ the job applicant.
        2. To provide with gainful work: factories that employ thousands.
  2. To put to use or service. See Synonyms at use.
  3. To devote (time, for example) to an activity or purpose: employed several months in learning Swahili.


Yes.  It says they are 'employable' as this and this and this.  First off, that can be something that was just kind of left alone since things became more strict.  I don't know.

However...in the cases of those helpfiles, it does not say they are widely hired (employed) and used for this.  It says they are employable as this.  It is a way of describing their uses.  'This is what they can do, should you ever have the need to hire them.'  Yes, mages do get hired.  Just generally not by anyone with a long-standing good reputation (i.e. noble houses).

Likewise, 'make questionable at best traveling companions' or 'invaluable as travelling companions' does the same, as well as showing a general outlook on that kind of magicker compared to others.  Indeed, there -is- nothing stopping people from hiring mages.  However, as noted...those with the resources to not do it may generally decide not to.  By the phrasing of those helpfiles, however, I'd say they're just very old. Perhaps even back from 'halflings in taverns' days, but I can be completely wrong.

And back the analogy.  You're still thinking about it the wrong way.  IN NO WAY DOES SAID ANALOGY COMPARE A MAGE TO A SORCERER.  Except one.  They both have things attached to them because of the role.  As a sorcerer, you're hunted down, killed, feared, etc.  As a -mage-, you are distrusted, generally hated, generally restricted, or forced to find a way around those limitations and general feelings.  The analogy just says...it's part of the role.

Ok, this topic exploded while I was reading it so I'm way behind on the current Armaddict vs. Xygax side of things, I stopped reading every post around page 13.  But I still have a few things to add.

I have played one mage.  A gemmed Oashi employee who is by far my favorite character and longest lived.  I fully understand the role isn't for everyone and will definitely differ due to your mage guild.  Being a gemmed Vivaduan is much different than being a gemmed Whiran even though they both are mages, these classes are all unique and the role they fill needs to be thought out in advance before making one.  I just wanted to voice my opposition to the "Oashi pet" talk, it's basically an aide role.  An aide role that you play while having the power to blow up a tavern's worth of people and pursue magick knowledge and plots.  Certainly isn't for everyone but those who haven't tried it should give it a lot of thought and do so sometime they know Oash is active (that also makes a big difference).

I'd also be in support of making all ungemmed mages cost more karma (making them all cost 6 karma seems fair).  It would definitely force most people to play gemmed mages so that there isn't a lopsided playerbase where 50% or more of mages are ungemmed.  This would basically be a push in the direction of establishing of the elementalist's Quarter as the mage haven of the gameworld and those outside it as exceptional cases.  This would be a big change to current PC populations but it makes perfect IC sense to me that mages all over the world would flock to the only open and public place they can exist in peace.

Doing so, however, would require alterimg the Mage's Quarter.  Make it easier for people to hire gemmed mages on a temporary basis as well as giving gemmers a culture of their own which is lacking.  Then also encouraging plots of magickers vs. mundanes in all their glory to help reinforce that mages are very very dangerous and though useful aren't cuddly bunnies of water giving.  Easier said than done though.

QuoteI'd also be in support of making all ungemmed mages cost more karma (making them all cost 6 karma seems fair)

This is really starting to get out of hand.

How exactly is making all ungemmed mages 6 karma going to improve Armageddon?

Quote from: "jcarter"

How exactly is making all ungemmed mages 6 karma going to improve Armageddon?

Sorry, but it has been already explained before. If you disagree with the points made, tell where you disagree.  If you did not understand, say where you lost it.

[Derailment]
Witch Hunter Robin is a 16 year old girl who is a craft user (elementalist) who's job is to basically hunt down other witches(rogue elementalists, psionists and sorcerers)...its a good anime show dealing with prejudice and fear...despite it being in modern japan it really would give insight on 'mundanes' and magickers.

[/derailment]

While it sounds like a great idea AC and i find the concept of mage hunters totally cool....the fact is a commoner appoaching any magicker for help in anyway or wanting to do something with them with being forced to is ICly crazy and borderline twinkish, at least in my perception with current Imm guildlines. There was that thread recently of how some people thought others should be more afraid of dealing with magickers then they were, even if being forced to work with them in the war in the current HRPT. In fact i think this thread stems from that one.

One of the ways i can icly see it be done is for certain clans (again i'm still thinking Tzai byn and Kurac) with imms support and blessing...is to begin educating and training a handful of individuals inorder to tackle special tasks, for example inorder to be able to work with an elementalist partner and not shit their pants. Or be equiped or have special knowledge that teh general commoners wouldn't know about on how to bring down a magicker of X type (I've never bothered reading the magick docs so i've never been 100% sure of the spellings of magicker names). I think this is perfectly reasonable and 100 percent unadulterated fun.

Like it has been stated the number of magickers in game isn't currently a problem but someday it just might be. I really don't think players that constantly play magickers or play a magicker ever second PC want imms to crack down on them...then again i don't think making them more karma restricting or having players trying to police themselves without knowing how many magickers are actually in the game at any given time is the solution.

What is?...Don't know  :cry:

Quote from: "Armaddict"
And back the analogy.  You're still thinking about it the wrong way.  IN NO WAY DOES SAID ANALOGY COMPARE A MAGE TO A SORCERER.  Except one.  They both have things attached to them because of the role.  As a sorcerer, you're hunted down, killed, feared, etc.  As a -mage-, you are distrusted, generally hated, generally restricted, or forced to find a way around those limitations and general feelings.  The analogy just says...it's part of the role.

Oh, I wasn't talking about the analogy at all.  Sorry if I wasn't clear.


My point is that I believe some of the baggage that is supposed to be associated with Sorcerers has leaked onto Elementalists, resulting in Elementalists receiving more hate and fear than they are entitled to.    Perhaps the IC slang/slur "magicker" becoming widely used OOCly on the GDB contributed to it.  Maybe it is the Tuluki mindset infecting the world at large.  I don't know.  The situation for Elementalists in Allanak seems worse to me today than it was when I started playing.  

(For a concrete, non-sensitive example of this consider the walling up of various roads leading in and out of the quarter.  This is really annoying if, for example, you want to go to the Bazaar.  Instead of an alley connecting Ruk's way to Trader's Road you now have to go all the way down to Caravan Road and around Melenath's circle.   Sure, there were IC explanations, but since it was an act of the Senate rather than PCs it felt very much like something imposed by staff rather than that developed naturally IC.)


I don't agree that the elementalists quarter was built to segregate or contain elementalists.  It was built to contain magick.  You have people casting in one section, so that the spell effects don't panic the herd.  Some spells are noisy or flashy, and that would bother the neighbours.  As far as I can tell the Elementalists themselves were always allowed to move and live anywhere in the city that commoners are allowed to live, because they are commoners.  They just had to restrict spells and spell effects to the Temple zone.


I don't play many Elementalists, in fact I don't play karma roles much, because of the pressure to perform with a karma role.  The changes I'd like to see wouldn't change that, because performance anxiety is all about OOC judgements, not the IC situation.  But even when I'm playing a ranger or a merchant I'd like to see the Elementalists in Allanak be useful members of society.


Angela Christine

Quote from: "Dre"While it sounds like a great idea AC and i find the concept of mage hunters totally cool....the fact is a commoner appoaching any magicker for help in anyway or wanting to do something with them with being forced to is ICly crazy and borderline twinkish, at least in my perception with current Imm guildlines.

This is exactly what I'm talking about in regards to players going so far overboard on how the documentation is perceived that all attempts at perspective have been lost.

They're tolerated in Allanak.  If you have an elementalist problem and can't wrap your mind around the idea of fighting fire with fire, then the problem must not be severe enough yet.  Elementalists are low in society, but they're not at the bottom and they're not illegal.  They're still in society.  They're still tolerated.  Tolerated, guys.  This is a word that has been used on every rpmud and yet the majority of players never seems to understand what it means to tolerate someone.

Has it ever occurred to any of you that these classes are not in game to play as a seperate group but to add intrigue to the already existing story?  How do you do that if you can't even wrap your minds around these people being in the same room without you thinking that addressing them is twinkish?

For some of you, this game is small.  For others, this game is shrinking.

Quote from: "Xygax"Yeah, ideally there should be more things for players of mages to do that don't so much involve interaction with non-mages.

-- X

X - some ideas for self-sustainability off the top of my head:

:arrow:  NPCs that will buy things created by mages (vivaduans, rukkians, a certain Krathi spell that branches fairly early).  If component craftables are sellable to NPCs in the Quarter - great, if not, need that too.

A food shop, a water shop (both tied in with previous idea).  

A stone shop (near the Rukkian temple of course!), some more "mundane" clothing merchants, shops to give PC mages the supplies they might need for their subguilds, as well as places to sell the things they create.

A few more tables and someone that sells drinks at that shady area in the plaza.  Having that spot in the plaza be quittable would be a plus but not as necessary.

A rumorboard specific for the elementalist's quarter.


:arrow:  Ideas to boost PC interaction:

The rumorboard would go a long way, as would a place easier to congregate in (i.e. more tables and such at that plaza).  

The rumorboard could have a "what you know" for each temple - notable personas, general relationships between the temples, guidelines, etc.

Immortals could give a little boost to the area by delegating someone to help oversee the Quarter and run some plots - for a totally cliche example perhaps a few Krathi students are persuing some arcane goal and the Drovian temple is out to sabotage them because their success would rupture a delicate experiment of the shadow mages.  Success/Failure of either could depend on some PC efforts and actions.

Stuff that gives gemmed something to strive for, a culture to feel a part of, a base to work off of rather than a mostly empty temple, some NPCs, and a plaza that looks really neat but is rarely visited by other PCs.  Things to keep them entertained, feeling useful, give them the ability to make a living with both mage or mundane abilities without having to greb salt, mine obsidian, or venture much into the "mundane" city.

The occasional mage might still wander out - those who want employment with Oash, those who want to try their luck out the gates, those who need a certain component and have to hire a hunter to go find it.  However, self-sustained would mean far more self-contained.

***

That said:  I don't really want to see gemmed mages turn into another iso-clan.

QuoteOh, I wasn't talking about the analogy at all. Sorry if I wasn't clear.

Ohhhh, I see.

Well...this goes back to the other thread (and I don't remember if this particular point ever got addressed or not).  But I thought that to the average commoner, there -would- be some sort of connection between an elementalist and a sorcerer?  The difference you stated that was clear was that sorcerers gather.  But what does gathering look like?  Can you notice it if the sorcerer is careful enough to not leave ash?  Do they all -know- the difference is gathering, or do they just trust Templars who tell them that this guy a sorcerer and needs to be killed?  I dunno...this is actually going to be kind of important in dictating just how segragated elementalists should be.  For me, I always saw it as magick is magick, but -these- magickers are tolerated because they aren't out destroying the world.

Quote from: "Intrepid"The truth is, LoD is wrong.  You don't make a rogue magicker to avoid interaction with the game.  You make a rogue magicker in order to ensure you can interact with the game without someone thinking it's ok to take a crap on you or just kill you outright because you looked in their general direction.

This would be especially true if I'd actually ever said that.

What I've said is that the mage model (someone who CAN, meaning it's possible, never interact with a single person and achieve high levels of power) could use some work.  And I've said that rogue magickers could use more direction and opportunities for non-violent socialization.  It's what Xygax has mentioned and the thrust of my original post.

Nowhere have I claimed that people make rogue magickers so they can avoid interaction with the game.  I've implied that it happens, and someone has admitted to doing it.  In fact, I desire the opposite - for rogue magickers to have better things to do with their time than spend it huddled in a cave or concerned with the comings and goings of mundane travellers, hunters,  and loggers.

-LoD

I think you can also play an independent ranger/warrior/pickpocket/burglar and reach high levels of power in your guild without ever having to interact with another person. It's possible for anybody. The question is why you'd want to, in a roleplaying game, but it isn't just a problem with mages.

You can do it with other guilds, but being a "powerful pickpocket" and being a "powerful elementalist" are two things so drastically far apart from one another that they aren't analogous at all. Complete apples and oranges.

Quote from: "LoD"What I've said is that the mage model (someone who CAN, meaning it's possible, never interact with a single person and achieve high levels of power) could use some work.  And I've said that rogue magickers could use more direction and opportunities for non-violent socialization.  It's what Xygax has mentioned and the thrust of my original post.

Nowhere have I claimed that people make rogue magickers so they can avoid interaction with the game.  I've implied that it happens, and someone has admitted to doing it.  In fact, I desire the opposite - for rogue magickers to have better things to do with their time than spend it huddled in a cave or concerned with the comings and goings of mundane travellers, hunters,  and loggers.

Right, right...and yet, although they're supposedly the only ones who can develop powers on their own *cough*RANGER*PSI*anynortherner*cough*, the fact of the matter is, they're also the group most likely to get hunted down anywhere.  So yes, it already balances out due to the inordinate amount of mage-hunters.

Also, these claims you and Pantoufle made are still, in my opinion, erroneous in nature.  Imms have been telling you that everything you've been saying is less severe than you claim, yet this continues to be pressed as an option to a problem that does not exist as you define it.

Muls were altered in karma because they were being played only as escaped slaves.  Muls are no longer being played at all, and I think the game has suffered.  Homogenizing the world because you have a bone to pick with even having see mages in game is another example of how a certain number of loud players are causing the world to shrink and degenerate into iso clans again.  I'm sorry, but iso-clans were never a good idea in this game, and although one of my favorite clans was shut down for its seeming inability to interact with the rest of the gameworld, I maintain that it was a good overall plan for the continued survival of the game.

In the direction you and a few others are trying to push the mud, the elementalist quarter would basically be its own game, with gemmers only coming out to interact with Oash and the templarate, if even that.  The only other option would be either being a rogue mage, in which case your perceived "number of mages" in the north will not shrink, or banding together in another iso clan--this is a supreme waste of player characters that basically is no better than having them on an entirely different server and only succeeds in compartmentalizing a game that has had to dig itself out of that error in the past.

The illusion of how many mages are in game will be broken by placing gemmers as the only playable mages for the majority of the game.  From what I'm seeing, the only thing this will succeed in doing is making them easier for you to identify and kill, and I don't believe that this is something that will improve the game outside of a few happy mage hunters.

If this ridiculous karma idea ever came into being, I would basically upgrade my choices and start apping for sorcs, ungemmed and psis as every other character.  The gemmer situation as it is currently, as well as the manner in which Allanak roleplays its reactions to magickers is, in my opinion, a failed model and I have no reason to interact within it as a known mage.

Basically what you're doing is that you are personally so incensed with the idea of mages being in game that you're willing to ensure the game is altered for your own narrow vision of the world, rather than actually taking into account the world as it is right now and what players have made of it in comparison to what it should be in the documentation--and this is not appropriate.

I'm pretty certain "defiling" is a word much dirtier to any Zalanthan than "magick". Compare "psychopath" and "organised crime". One is bad news for everyone, no matter who you are, and the other, while still extraordinarily dicey to deal with, is something many people find it possible to work with or around.

Of course most Noble Houses won't hire magickers. To draw together something in the 'Nakki noble docs I mentioned in another thread: one of the main points of the noble classes is to present the citizens with a pleasingly mundane alternative to the templarate. If the nobles start surrounding themselves with magickers, they to some extent forfeit this.

This is where you'd normally get the Quirk Standard Rant On How He Would Love To See A Grittier Zalanthas. Consider it said. The three people in the audience who always cheer enthusiastically can do so if they like, and the rest of you can roll your eyes just for the sake of tradition. But, there are a lot of smaller organisations in game, most virtual, a couple coded, that have every excuse for employing gemmed magickers. Their jobs are harsher, and if it's a choice between having a finger-wiggler do his stuff (preferably out of sight if possible) and all getting home safely, or carrying the boss and four of his best men back in a tasteful sandcloth shroud, many of them are going to swallow their superstitions. The docs certainly suggest they do.

I'm pretty certain I've mentioned this before as well, but back in the dark days when man was barely civilised, and every rock and tree and river contained a potentially malignant spirit, a lot of religion was based around appeasement, trying to bribe the demon to your side. (You could argue that for many religions more sophisticated appeasements are still the order of the day). It's as valid a reaction to a power you fear as running away, or trying to destroy it: buy it off, persuade it to take your side. And gemmed magickers, seemingly an oft-tamed power, are relatively easy to bargain with compared to a hostile spirit.

I would however like to see fewer gemmers in the Commoner's Quarter through having a more congenial Elementalist Quarter. I don't think it's going to necessarily lead to iso-clannish behaviour - at least, not much worse than now, when we appear to have iso-clans that happen to co-habit the same space. I think having gemmers be less frequently seen and more frequently hired for jobs would go a long way toward making gemmer-mundane relations more enjoyable for everyone.

QuoteNowhere have I claimed that people make rogue magickers so they can avoid interaction with the game.  I've implied that it happens, and someone has admitted to doing it.  In fact, I desire the opposite - for rogue magickers to have better things to do with their time than spend it huddled in a cave or concerned with the comings and goings of mundane travellers, hunters,  and loggers.

I hope you're not referring to me, because even tho I said that this is one of the only way current rogue magickers can hope to survive, I despise it and try as much to avoid it. But currently, there is no other way around if you wish to grow stronger. Hiding yourself from others and keeping your magick a secret is the definition of a rogue magicker. You can't blame rogue magickers for hiding from others if they are constantly hunted and killed on sight, and that's the way it should be, but don't blame us for hiding if we want to grow stronger and be able to protect ourselves.

Yes, while we do it it doesn't add anything to the game, but I like to think that this part of it is just a small percentage of the average rogue magicker rp.

I haven't played a Magicker, or played for a long time in the first place, but here's my two cents. I pretty much agree with Quirk - magickers ought to be feared, and your average person ought to make a fair effort to avoid them in their day-to-day lives. If there's no avoiding one, though, or they have the potential to be very useful to you, then by all means saunter on over and have a (nervous) word with them. As long as you're not shaking their hand, slapping them on the back, and offering to let them sleep with your daughter (or son, or innix), then you're probably acting within reason.

Quote from: "Intrepid"

Quote from: "Dre"While it sounds like a great idea AC and i find the concept of mage hunters totally cool....the fact is a commoner appoaching any magicker for help in anyway or wanting to do something with them with being forced to is ICly crazy and borderline twinkish, at least in my perception with current Imm guildlines.

This is exactly what I'm talking about in regards to players going so far overboard on how the documentation is perceived that all attempts at perspective have been lost.

They're tolerated in Allanak.  If you have an elementalist problem and can't wrap your mind around the idea of fighting fire with fire, then the problem must not be severe enough yet.  Elementalists are low in society, but they're not at the bottom and they're not illegal.  They're still in society.  They're still tolerated.  Tolerated, guys.  This is a word that has been used on every rpmud and yet the majority of players never seems to understand what it means to tolerate someone.

Has it ever occurred to any of you that these classes are not in game to play as a seperate group but to add intrigue to the already existing story?  How do you do that if you can't even wrap your minds around these people being in the same room without you thinking that addressing them is twinkish?

For some of you, this game is small.  For others, this game is shrinking.

I wouldn't go pointing fingers at the players..let me refer you to this:

http://www.zalanthas.org/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=20606

While i am not saying your wrong esspecially in 'nak (i usually stick to Tuluk), if what you are saying is true i would have assumed there would have been an imm or two posting something along the lines of 'give your fellow elementalist a chance'. I've always thoughts its the 'Nak templars that tolerate the elementalists not the actual commoners who fear their powers.

Now if an imm comes in here and tells us that your passionate sounding post is completely right, then my next PC will be definately have to be in Nak.  :D

I do see some things said here that I very much agree with.

The thing that makes playing a gemmed mage rather boring is the lack of options. You -must- leave the Elementalist's Quarter to get a drink, purchase food (non-magick food), etc.. There isn't much in the way of places to socialize. I would like to see a tavern in their quarter in addition to some other things that might provide places of interest for them. I would like to see it possible for a gemmed mage to never have to leave the quarter (if they choose) and still be able to interact with other mages in a social setting. It would be interesting if there were some sort of "elementalist clan" made up of those of different elements.

More opportunity for jobs outside of the quarter. As others have said, your only options are -usually- working for House Oash or working for the templarate. I would like to see other clans put mages to use commonly in Allanak. It doesn't mean they have to be necessarily treated any differently (although, as some have said people go a bit to extremes which I find unrealistic as well) but use them as IMO, Allanaki should, as -tools-.

I wanted to add, that some have said or implied that all rogue mages are raiders, evil, etc. This just isn't true. I have yet to make a mage pc that was doing anything other than trying to survive. Those I played, who did even meet other magickers, none of the others appeared to be doing anything other than trying to survive as well. Also, I do mix it up. I play everything -and- I had the karma for mages for a while before I really did play them at all. I don't think changing the karma tree is right considering some people would basically be getting docked karma because -others- have no self control. How about just nailing the ones who are doing nothing but playing mage after mage? I think that's alot more fair to the rest of us.

The only way one can centralize the population of magickers as gemmed elementalists in Allanak is to form some sort of "union" that would allow the playerbase of mages to be pulled together. A tavern, OOC board, and possible coded clan that acts on missions for the templarate or for its own interests would also spur growth amongst the gemmed population, I think.

Perhaps then gemmed mages would have something to look forward to besides Oash or the Guild.

As a rogue magicker who thinks he knows a fair portion of the rogue
magickers in the game world...

Quote from: "Xygax"a) I don't care whether the mage is gemmed or ungemmed.  They should have magick-y goals beyond just "branch 'assault snake'" (which is a good idea for a spell, isn't it??).

... I've started to notice that there are some sorts of things like that, but
it seems that those sorts of things do not come into play until later down
the line in the magickers' life, after they already have branched assault
snake (ps. make it branch for my guild, please =)).  They wouldn't even
know about it until later down the line, so in the meantime their only real
magick-y goals they got are to continue practicing and learn new magick.

Quote from: "Xygax"b) I'm not talking about IC employment, I'm talking about goals and tasks that act as catalysts for interaction with the world (whether that interaction be negative or positive, again I don't care -- but I am a big fan of friction)

That's true, and my character has gotten a hint that certain neato things
could occur or be sought out, but for a character that I may play, or
another may play, I or another might need to break role in order to
pursue them.  I'm being vague but only because I have to for IC
reasons. :)

Quote from: "Xygax"Right now, I think many mages spend their time engaged in seeking power for power's sake, without any long-term end goal in sight.  A long term end goal (or series of long-term goals) with both coded and RP'd "milestones" would benefit them and benefit the game by keeping them largely out of other players' hair (or actively IN other player's hair, but hopefully with more IC purpose than simply preying on them).

I totally agree about the power for power's sake, and the goal additions
thing, but with my character I've been trying to mix it up in a way where
the character's role will allow it. In general, my character has had a lot
of difficulties with doing it, though. Its still been fun, but, hasn't resulted
in much.

Quote from: "Xygax"That's a larger project though.  I think it would be interesting to flesh out some simpler systems that keep mages busy with things that non-mages either can't perceive or don't have access to.  There are already magick-y "things" all over the world, but in many respects those things don't actually DO much.  Giving magickers more natural enemies or parasites -- things they can struggle against beyond the realms mundane PCs have access to -- would be tremendously cool, I think.

Maybe while Halaster's been adding a few nifty things here and there to
magickers, making them more fearful (his words on here, not me
revealing anything), at the same time some things going the other way
would also be neat.

- Ktavialt

Just a little disturbed by one comment in your post Ktavialt.

There is never a reason to break role, seeking powerful things your character doesn't know about is an OOC want, not an IC need.

I promise that if you play long enough, and survive long enough the "very cool" things will come your way. I can attest to this through personal experience.

Don't go out of your way to get "stuff" or whatever, a watched pot doesn't boil if you know what I mean.

Quote from: "Dan"Just a little disturbed by one comment in your post Ktavialt.

There is never a reason to break role, seeking powerful things your character doesn't know about is an OOC want, not an IC need.

Oh of course, I didn't mean to say that I have broke role, I am just saying
that in my limited view of what is out there, they are things my character
would not pursue, and several others that I know.

If I wrote it in a way that suggests I did break role, whoops.  I haven't. I've
always sticked to my char's role.

- Ktavialt