|
Post by gloryhound on May 7, 2014 17:03:17 GMT -5
We don't have to rip them all out of the game though, but why not take out PC elementalists. Leave the sorcerers in, leave the NPC gemmed in. Just please add some new option at the same time. Maybe some sort of ghoulish race that can only feed on the dead? Maybe a race that has some advantages but takes rapid damage in sunlight except at dawn or dusk, or when a certain moon is up? Something!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 7, 2014 17:06:06 GMT -5
I imagine, the odds of such drastic changes and new code happening were much greater in Black Sands, then Armageddon. Buuut, we were more busy saying how similar it was to Arm, then actually enriching the actual game.
|
|
|
Post by jcarter on May 7, 2014 17:27:22 GMT -5
Wikipedia has a pretty good definition of low vs high fantasy
Zalanthas is entirely fictional. It has its own extremely unique physics. In no way whatsoever are animals like the thri-keen, bahamets, or mekillots realistic.
I personally believe Arm was intended to originally be low/medium fantasy, similar to how A Song of Ice and Fire is fantasy with magic but the plots and themes mainly focus on realism. But somewhere along the way, we went from a harsh survival game about lower-than-dirt peasants living in oppressive cities backstabbing each other to having super-powered templars running around and settling wars by dropping volcanos.
|
|
|
Post by topkekm8s on May 7, 2014 17:46:36 GMT -5
i cast volcano i cast lazerbeam
muh lifetrees
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 8, 2014 9:38:07 GMT -5
Wikipedia has a pretty good definition of low vs high fantasy Zalanthas is entirely fictional. It has its own extremely unique physics. In no way whatsoever are animals like the thri-keen, bahamets, or mekillots realistic. I personally believe Arm was intended to originally be low/medium fantasy, similar to how A Song of Ice and Fire is fantasy with magic but the plots and themes mainly focus on realism. But somewhere along the way, we went from a harsh survival game about lower-than-dirt peasants living in oppressive cities backstabbing each other to having super-powered templars running around and settling wars by dropping volcanos. Regardless of what they intended, or what it turned out to be, I don't recall them ever claiming it was low-magick. The claim (accurate or not) was low-fantasy. Some people criticize the game using the justification "it's supposed to be low-magick!" Those people are wrong.
|
|
|
oh shit!
May 8, 2014 10:10:04 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by lyse on May 8, 2014 10:10:04 GMT -5
I'm sorry, but you have to admit magick is fuckin awesome. It's really twinky players that mess that up. Nobody says anything about dwarf warriors whose focus is to master every weapon style in the game; they're scary too. If you twink it, your ability to play it should just be taken away no matter what it is.
|
|
|
Post by jcarter on May 8, 2014 10:14:12 GMT -5
Wikipedia has a pretty good definition of low vs high fantasy Zalanthas is entirely fictional. It has its own extremely unique physics. In no way whatsoever are animals like the thri-keen, bahamets, or mekillots realistic. I personally believe Arm was intended to originally be low/medium fantasy, similar to how A Song of Ice and Fire is fantasy with magic but the plots and themes mainly focus on realism. But somewhere along the way, we went from a harsh survival game about lower-than-dirt peasants living in oppressive cities backstabbing each other to having super-powered templars running around and settling wars by dropping volcanos. Regardless of what they intended, or what it turned out to be, I don't recall them ever claiming it was low-magick. The claim (accurate or not) was low-fantasy. Some people criticize the game using the justification "it's supposed to be low-magick!" Those people are wrong. Semantics. Low magic goes hand in hand with low fantasy and I think you'd be hard-pressed to come up with any low fantasy settings that also aren't low magic.
|
|
MartenBroadcloak
Displaced Tuluki
It's not a shit post if you spell check (tm)
Posts: 370
|
Post by MartenBroadcloak on May 8, 2014 10:44:35 GMT -5
Regardless of what they intended, or what it turned out to be, I don't recall them ever claiming it was low-magick. The claim (accurate or not) was low-fantasy. Some people criticize the game using the justification "it's supposed to be low-magick!" Those people are wrong. Semantics. Low magic goes hand in hand with low fantasy and I think you'd be hard-pressed to come up with any low fantasy settings that also aren't low magic. fan·ta·sy [fan-tuh-see, -zee] A genre of fiction that commonly uses magic and other supernatural phenomena as a primary plot element, theme, or setting. *jumps into slapfight, slapping wildly, wheheheheheeee!*
|
|
|
Post by jcarter on May 8, 2014 11:11:35 GMT -5
Semantics. Low magic goes hand in hand with low fantasy and I think you'd be hard-pressed to come up with any low fantasy settings that also aren't low magic. fan·ta·sy [fan-tuh-see, -zee] A genre of fiction that commonly uses magic and other supernatural phenomena as a primary plot element, theme, or setting. *jumps into slapfight, slapping wildly, wheheheheheeee!*how does a dictionary definition stating "commonly" (not mandatory or required) somehow refute that a sub-genre of fantasy known as 'low fantasy' involves little to no usage of magic?
|
|
|
oh shit!
May 8, 2014 11:19:53 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by rusarmroleplayerfan on May 8, 2014 11:19:53 GMT -5
fan·ta·sy [fan-tuh-see, -zee] A genre of fiction that commonly uses magic and other supernatural phenomena as a primary plot element, theme, or setting. *jumps into slapfight, slapping wildly, wheheheheheeee!*how does a dictionary definition stating "commonly" (not mandatory or required) somehow refute that a sub-genre of fantasy known as 'low fantasy' involves little to no usage of magic? Haha, if anything I think Marten's post supports jcarter's assertion.
|
|
|
Post by gloryhound on May 8, 2014 12:12:54 GMT -5
Personally, I don't mind have a few gemmed around, and I think it's natural for them to associate with each other given that (1) everyone else is at best tepid toward them, and (2) leaving the city alone is a good way to get killed.
But the bitching just never stops and I'm entirely sick of that.
|
|
MartenBroadcloak
Displaced Tuluki
It's not a shit post if you spell check (tm)
Posts: 370
|
Post by MartenBroadcloak on May 8, 2014 15:48:30 GMT -5
LOL! I was trying to support you, jerkwad! xD Fine! I'll withdraw my slaps on your behalf jcarter!! *shakes fist*
|
|
|
Post by spitwad on May 8, 2014 15:57:03 GMT -5
prefer tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/LowFantasy because it is only certain things driving low fantasy in arm yes Cynicism: Low fantasy is famous for its gray morality (or in nastier cases, Black and Gray Morality), while high fantasy is famous for its Black and White Morality. could do better with this, but still most plots are mundane, even if most important plots aren't Plot scope: Tends to focus more on the survival and tribulations of one or a few individuals rather than the whole world. A villainous king who steals a magical artifact is less likely to be trying to bring back the Infernal Legions of Hell and conquer the world. can't rape though, dammit Heroism: High fantasy heroes are usually all-around nice guys who stand up for the little guy and fight the bad guy. Low fantasy heroes tend to be bitter cynics desperately clinging to their broken moral compass or devil-may-care anti-heroes who save the woman from the evil sorcerer just for the sex. could do better here Methods: Victories achieved through physical combat, not magical battles or moral superiority - the defining feature of Heroic Fantasy. yep Tone: Tends to be darker or more comedic than your average high-fantasy world. yes, yes i would Sorcerers: In high fantasy, they're kindly old men who sling fireballs in the name of justice, with the exception of the villain. Magic also tends to be treated as a wondrous force that binds the world together. Low fantasy (just like its sibling genre Dark Fantasy) treats sorcerers as freakishly evil, and quite often insane people who would sacrifice a thousand virgins to some hideous monstrosity from another dimension just to increase their power a tiny bit. Magic is well within Things Man Was Not Meant to Know territory and is often thought of as the evil corrupting force that entices innocent people into doing anything for power. And this all assumes, of course, that magic exists at all - there are examples where magic is essentially non-existent. drops volcano so you can't have it War: In high fantasy a clear "Good vs. Evil" smackdown between civilized races and the Always Chaotic Evil races. In low fantasy, a useless war between two empires to make their lands marginally bigger.
|
|
|
Post by tektolnes on May 9, 2014 15:08:33 GMT -5
I love tvtropes.org.
At any rate, I agree with the assertion that low-fantasy and low-magick go hand in hand for the most part. However, I think claiming that Zalanthas is a high fantasy setting because there is a high percentage of people playing magickers is a facile argument. The reason I say this is that I don't feel that the setting is determined by the actions of the player base. Somewhere in the 3 - 3.5e D&D core books it stated that "the PCs are the exception to the rule." What they mean is that, the PCs are meant to have exceptional abilities, wealth, lives, etc. They are not "common."
This is true of every book/movie/game you've ever read/watched/played. No one is interested in a story about an average person with average abilities leading an average, uneventful life. So why should we play Armageddon like this? If you want to play a commoner who lives on like 300 sid a year cleaning up inix shit and begging, be my guest. Me, I want to play a skilled hunter, or an elite guardsman, or a well-versed adventurer, or a mystic mage. I want to have a stat roll that isn't average, average, average and average. I'm not saying we should all play statuesque Mary Sue characters. I'm just saying that we should assume our characters are more talented, well connected, lucky and/or interesting than 90% of the NPC population.
Saying Zalanthas is high fantasy because there happens to be a lot of mages around is like saynig that the population of Westeros is comprised of 90% nobility, because Marten writes almost exclusively about Lords & Ladies.
|
|
jkarr
GDB Superstar
Posts: 2,030
|
Post by jkarr on May 9, 2014 15:24:54 GMT -5
agreed but if ur pbase isn't reflecting that disparity, like it or not the pc interaction is wat fuels the perception of overgickness, and unless ur source of rp satisfaction is coming from mobs then it is less helpful to use the pcs are speshul argument to smooth over the relative abundance in gicking in pbase compared to virtual world when the first is where most of our interactions are centered.
|
|