|
Post by lulz on May 6, 2014 23:11:53 GMT -5
A crude but effective solution is to use the code to limit the availability of magick; elemental guilds being closed or capped is a good first step and a firm message to the players as a whole that regularly coloring outside the lines has now brought about consequences. We don't need to remove magick from the game world, just from the hands of players who refuse to adhere to the central themes of the game. I could get behind this. I remember when things were at their worst during the "end plot". I once fought an avangion or something to that effect with a whiran of mine, an androgynous being or some such. I'd be down with imposing a cap on magickal guilds/psionicists. Things of that nature should be restricted, even more so than they are now. I loved magick when I was around, as evidenced by the number of nilazi/elkrosians I played. That being said, too much of a good thing ain't too sweet, and just because you have karma that doesn't entitle you to roll up a krathi and go gallivanting about the known WIT RANGZ AND FLAMING SWORDS. Putting a cap on the number allowed will bring back the aspect of fear that was so prevalent in the late nineties/earlier 2000s.
|
|
delerak
GDB Superstar
PK'ed by jcarter
"When you want to fool the world, tell the truth." - Otto Von Bismarck
Posts: 1,656
|
Post by delerak on May 6, 2014 23:52:59 GMT -5
I'd prefer it to be removed completely because magic was supposed to be so rare in the setting that to justify allowing players to play it you're basically saying it's not rare enough for you because you're a special player. Hypothetically if every .0001% of people born are born with elemental powers how can you justify allowing players access to that small part of the population and how can you justify the insane shit that goes on in the game with it. The cities and sorcerer-kings I get but having it so open harms the overall integrity of the post-apocalyptic theme which was brought about from harmful magic which completely destroyed the environment.
|
|
delerak
GDB Superstar
PK'ed by jcarter
"When you want to fool the world, tell the truth." - Otto Von Bismarck
Posts: 1,656
|
Post by delerak on May 6, 2014 23:54:46 GMT -5
I guess what I'm trying to say is people hate magic for a reason. People are supposed to fear it and the gemmers/mage quarter is probably the worst idea they ever implemented on the game. Elementalists should be hated on the same level as defilers. To illiterate commoners it is all the same.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 7, 2014 1:27:08 GMT -5
I guess what I'm trying to say is people hate magic for a reason. People are supposed to fear it and the gemmers/mage quarter is probably the worst idea they ever implemented on the game. Elementalists should be hated on the same level as defilers. To illiterate commoners it is all the same. Disagree. One makes ash and kills everything, the other doesn't. One is kill on sight by the guys who (kind of) protect the city, so clearly it's harmful. The other they food, shelter, and house in their own quarter of the city. There are thousands of elementalists, in a city with half a million people, even if elementalists are a small number (1-3% wouldn't be inaccurate, though that might frankly skew low) and by design both IC (templars and nobles) and OOC (staff), there are no bars in the gemmed quarter, specifically BECAUSE it forces the gemmed out of their comfortably hidey hole if they want to so much as get a drink. Whether of not you agree with it, the fact of the matter is, you're advocating that thousands of people who exist, and exist for a very specific IC purpose within the framework of the city which can be found out in the Secrets thread, or IC, be taken out, with no logical explanation or excuse. You want to see OP? Max d-elf AI agi on warspice with a bow in desert camo 2-hit sniping people from 3 rooms away with no chance of being discovered because stat and item bonuses make you so stealth it is *numerically impossible* for you to be perceived. Saying magick is OP is untrue. The game is not about balance, and mundanes can abuse the code to be just as OP. Saying that it makes no sense and the arguments given for it, is coming from a place that ignores basic IC realities.
|
|
Hardboiled
Clueless newb
Eggs, their good for you.
Posts: 116
|
Post by Hardboiled on May 7, 2014 6:54:49 GMT -5
Woah I really wanted to come into this thread swinging but I feel I should wait til it simmers down a bit. At this point it seems like ganging up on one person rather then their ideas. However I will definately need to return to this topic.
Some points though, that will hopefully get things back to debating the subject rather then focusing on each other:
1. I agree with the gemmer population being low, staff has always hinted at this. They might have their own quarter which ICly is isolated from the rest of the area. You shouldn't really see gemmers roaming around the street of normal folks (very often at least). Given the army numbers I can't see there being more then half that of gemmers at any one time. Given a group of gemmers could be equal to a small squadron of people, having more gemmers then half the number of your regular army is sheer lunacy. I would probably place the number around 3-5~ thousand but no more then that.
2. Magick is fun, powerful, gives you freedom your mundane can never have. Not to mention its so easy and quick to train your skills as opposed to backstab, archery and combat skills on top of those needed to be remotely powerful. A 40day old ranger is powerful, but that a long investment in comparison to the 5 days it took a whiran to get there. Losing that ranger hurts, you lose a mage, well you can have another one that powerful in a couple days. There needs to be a draw back, and I agree with everyone else there really isn't much of one lately. However, like alot of things in Armageddon it is poorly designed, your mage is sooo much fun because playing a mundane can be soo fucking tedious. Ask yourselves, how many of your mages had mates? How many of your mages had friends, groups of poeple to do stuff with. I know the last couple of mages I played had an easier time getting all these things then my mundane. I had someone comment tell me that their newbie mage had someone come up and offer them sex, while their high ranking mundane f-me pc had a lonely exsistance. Go figure.
3. This is about balance. And contrary to popular belief there is a very special balance to armageddon. Mages get power, freedom and quick easy skill training, in exchange they should be utter outcasts. NO EXCEPTION. MUndanes do not know they are responsible for food, water, magickal energies to templars. They are outcasts, they don't mix with mundanes, heck most of them should barely want to mix with each other. Much in the way playing nobles can be lonely boring roles at times. Again its been poorly designed. And certain people love to play them, they want the power, freedom, and social benifits that should only be reserved for mundanes. Again why play a mundane when you need to beg to get a wagon done, where as mages get castles,friends, mates, exploration and even planes of exsistance dedicated to them?
I say this as someone who truely enjoying playing mages for the same reason that it needs to be toned down. The love given to mages over the years need to be given back to the bulk of the population which should be mundanes. I like jcarter's idea, all elementalists should cause some adverse effect. I would go as far as to say they should drain certain stats if you are in the room with them longer then say an IC hour. Gemmers, thanks to their gem should be able to get away with staying around mundanes slightly longer, and the negative effects would be cancelled out so long as you have a templar in the room with you. Rogue mages should be scarce, like completely app only, in the same league as sorcerers apps.
Again if you want the power, freedom, and easy training that comes with mages, you should be giving up something just as great. That the balance of armageddon. Thats the way it should be. However again the fact people enjoy mage roles so fucking much is because it hasn't been this way. Again as someone who enjoys playing mages too, playing a mage is too much of a win button right now. Its sad but its true.
Lastly some people mentioned tuluk and yes, its why i posted what i did in the tuluk thread. Being able to avoid magick was one of the benifits of playing in tuluk. However lets not forget that the entire setting should be low magick. Magick should be rare everywhere, even in allanak despite its (very small) population of gemmers, who are really isolated from the rest of the population in their own quarter.
|
|
jjhardy
Displaced Tuluki
Posts: 280
|
Post by jjhardy on May 7, 2014 10:43:11 GMT -5
Perhaps if Magick was literally a roll of the dice when you create a character instead of a karma restricted concept. IE, you create a merchant and 'SURPRISE'. You're a Whiran. Of course if that happens, you get capped to maybe second tier of skills in your 'main' guild.
|
|
|
Post by snorpborp on May 7, 2014 10:57:21 GMT -5
Perhaps if Magick was literally a roll of the dice when you create a character instead of a karma restricted concept. IE, you create a merchant and 'SURPRISE'. You're a Whiran. Of course if that happens, you get capped to maybe second tier of skills in your 'main' guild. I assumed it worked this way when I first started. Was disappointed. Unexpected manifestation would rock.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 7, 2014 11:00:25 GMT -5
Perhaps if Magick was literally a roll of the dice when you create a character instead of a karma restricted concept. IE, you create a merchant and 'SURPRISE'. You're a Whiran. Of course if that happens, you get capped to maybe second tier of skills in your 'main' guild. I assumed it worked this way when I first started. Was disappointed. Unexpected manifestation would rock. I've always wished it worked this way. It would make it more rare, a genuine surprise, and would make magickers genuinely dangerous and hide-able.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 7, 2014 11:00:57 GMT -5
Perhaps if Magick was literally a roll of the dice when you create a character instead of a karma restricted concept. IE, you create a merchant and 'SURPRISE'. You're a Whiran. Of course if that happens, you get capped to maybe second tier of skills in your 'main' guild. Yes please.
|
|
|
Post by tektolnes on May 7, 2014 13:36:53 GMT -5
It's neat in concept, but at the end of the day, it's a game. I want to play the character I apped. Basically the same argument applies to the idea of capping the number of magickers in game at a time. I don't want to be denied my elkran because there's already some elkran/tailor jackass whose biggest adventure so far consisted of going to Red Storm to make 10,000 coins off his subguild before he went back to exclusively sitting in his Temple or the Gaj, trying to convince people to fuck him. It's a game. If I want rules, restrictions, and disappointments I'd go do my taxes.
That being said, I really don't think it's that bad presently. I can't remember the last time I saw a mundane and magicker team up without a more powerful force playing a factor (common goals, minions to a defiler or Templar, etc). I'm sure there are some fuckheads out there that are doing it, but then again when aren't there? My experience in the last couple of years has largely been that magickers are disliked, ignored, or downright insulted or assaulted. Sure, there are a select few people who are blinded by the "melon-breasts" in your description, and will want to fuck your gemmer. This flies in the face of what the documentation says is normal, certainly. But to put it into perspective, we live in a world where grandma/amputee/midget/child/rape porn exists, so it's pointless to argue that someone somewhere wanting to fuck a magicker is "unrealistic."
Magickally tolerant PCs should be the exception and not the rule - and they still are. Sure, Arm doesn't rank as highly in this area of magic-phobia as it did circa '01. But almost no aspect does these days. If you want to say that players shouldn't be allowed to play out their niche role just because it's against what the documentation outlines as common, then don't whine when Nyr takes your karma away citing that his interpretation of the documentation trumps your concept of your character and their behavior.
That all being said, I do like the idea of adding coded negatives of hanging around mages. Maybe not so much from sitting in the Gaj with them, but perhaps from being around active magick. Like being in the room with a mage who is under the effect of a spell (fire armor, stoneskin), or who has a magick item (ring, weapon, mount) worth 1 point. Being in the room with a mage who casts a spell is worth 5 points. Being effected by a spell (getting hit with a flamestrike, receiving a heal spell, eating rukkian food, wearing a magick ring) is worth 25 points. When you accrue 1000 points you may be prone to some affliction that weakens your life force (lowers a stat), etc.
(Not an exact system, points are there to provide scaling and concept, basically.)
This would deter magicker-empathy while not out-right Nyring it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 7, 2014 15:25:18 GMT -5
It's neat in concept, but at the end of the day, it's a game. I want to play the character I apped. Basically the same argument applies to the idea of capping the number of magickers in game at a time. I don't want to be denied my elkran because there's already some elkran/tailor jackass whose biggest adventure so far consisted of going to Red Storm to make 10,000 coins off his subguild before he went back to exclusively sitting in his Temple or the Gaj, trying to convince people to fuck him. It's a game. If I want rules, restrictions, and disappointments I'd go do my taxes. That being said, I really don't think it's that bad presently. I can't remember the last time I saw a mundane and magicker team up without a more powerful force playing a factor (common goals, minions to a defiler or Templar, etc). I'm sure there are some fuckheads out there that are doing it, but then again when aren't there? My experience in the last couple of years has largely been that magickers are disliked, ignored, or downright insulted or assaulted. Sure, there are a select few people who are blinded by the "melon-breasts" in your description, and will want to fuck your gemmer. This flies in the face of what the documentation says is normal, certainly. But to put it into perspective, we live in a world where grandma/amputee/midget/child/rape porn exists, so it's pointless to argue that someone somewhere wanting to fuck a magicker is "unrealistic." Magickally tolerant PCs should be the exception and not the rule - and they still are. Sure, Arm doesn't rank as highly in this area of magic-phobia as it did circa '01. But almost no aspect does these days. If you want to say that players shouldn't be allowed to play out their niche role just because it's against what the documentation outlines as common, then don't whine when Nyr takes your karma away citing that his interpretation of the documentation trumps your concept of your character and their behavior. That all being said, I do like the idea of adding coded negatives of hanging around mages. Maybe not so much from sitting in the Gaj with them, but perhaps from being around active magick. Like being in the room with a mage who is under the effect of a spell (fire armor, stoneskin), or who has a magick item (ring, weapon, mount) worth 1 point. Being in the room with a mage who casts a spell is worth 5 points. Being effected by a spell (getting hit with a flamestrike, receiving a heal spell, eating rukkian food, wearing a magick ring) is worth 25 points. When you accrue 1000 points you may be prone to some affliction that weakens your life force (lowers a stat), etc. (Not an exact system, points are there to provide scaling and concept, basically.) This would deter magicker-empathy while not out-right Nyring it. *standing ovation* The percentage of people who are 'magick friendly' but aren't magickers has been very small the entire time I ever did play. And usually if you get to delve any into their backstory, something about it figures into the why. There was a merchant who kept hitting on all the gemmed I played. One of them wound up talking to her long enough to find out that her mother was a magicker (and apparently she wasn't just attracted to women or magickers, but magicker women, consequently), and apparently fucked her up if she was only attracted to archetypes which reminded her of her at the end of the day. In fact, outside pcs played by one of maybe 4 players, every character I've seen who wasn't distant, at the least, from mages, was either a half-giant who was programmed to tolerate some things of mages but not others by their sargent, long term friends with a pc who manifested, or had something in their background about family who was at one point. While I like the idea of penalties being around magickers, I think those penalties should be wiped if the pc is gemmed unless they are actively doing magick around you or targetting you with magick, and they definitely should not apply in the middle of the city unless the pc is doing magick. Why? Because magickers are not able/allowed to use magick in the city without being jailed or killed as a result. And the negatives come from the magick, not the being wielding it. While I've seen other people have the same 'no' reaction to the surprise rolled magickers, I am talking about something different, I think, than the guy who was proposing it. I'm talking about you're a ranger. Surprise, you have magick. It doesn't alter your ranger in any way unless you let it. You can choose to ignore it (though that may be taken over and forced at some point by someone with the ability to 'force' your pc to do a thing), you can hide it, you can still have all your abilities intact. I'm talking about it more in the sense of: Yes, being a magicker should be a surprise, and yes it should be rare, and it should make you stupidly powerful. I think that this would be a good way to enforce all of those things. And just to really drive shit home and keep it from being abusable, have it roll for manifestation on your pc's birthdays, so you can't see you're not magick, then suicide and make a new pc to try and game the system about it. Ah the mud I'm helping to work on now. >.< We're hashing out different systems, skills, classes, etc, to establish how any and all of it should work while my husband and I work on learning ruby to actually get it built. Good times.
|
|
|
Post by snorpborp on May 7, 2014 15:37:38 GMT -5
Yes. It would be neat to see one spell added for minor manifestations. You're a normal ranger/bard. One birthday "create water" shows up on your skill list. > think Well fuck.
|
|
|
Post by lyse on May 7, 2014 16:26:40 GMT -5
Yeah, I think ripping magickers out of the game isn't very sensible. But in my opinion, Zalanthas isn't as low-magick as the docs say and you can see that just from playing the game or reading the history. I think it's a misnomer that has gone on for too long. But again the docs are confusing and contradictory in some places, so getting into a huff about what they say or don't say is, well....a little silly. There shouldn't be super mages running around either, but by nature they are powerful beings and we know what happens when twinks get their hands on something powerful. There's a lot of asshole players; making them require karma was a bad move to me, because it kind of screws off-peakers and people that can't spend 8 hours a day everyday playing Arm (having a life)out of something they might have an interest in playing at some point and don't want to special app something. Something more sensible would just be to take away that option for people that abuse it instead of punishing everybody.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 7, 2014 16:37:03 GMT -5
It really all depends on how it's understood. Low magick. High Magick. For me. High Magick is when playing a mage is normal. When playing a mage is no different then playing a cleric, or a thief. When two warriors can discuss in a tavern, which shield is best at resisting fireballs and which enchanter shop got better magickal gear for sale. That's high magick and that's not how it is in Arm.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 7, 2014 16:42:34 GMT -5
I don't remember seeing the docs say it's low magick. I remember them saying it's low-fantasy. Meaning, it's not Tolkienesque (which is an example of high fantasy).
|
|