blueruby
Order of Starkhaven
Plot Staff
Captain Anne Cash
Posts: 924
|
Post by blueruby on May 12, 2016 18:35:23 GMT -5
And I stand by what I had said. I don't ever go out alone. I don't try to get into the middle of the fighting. I stay behind the shield wall to put bodies, shields, and armor between me and the enemies. Doing so gives me the chance to cast the spells I choose from relative safety. I also tend to shy away from high-cost or damage-dealing spells, in part because I as a caster hate when I waste 4-8 mana on a spell that misses (and feel much better when it's only 1-2), and in part because I feel like it fits with the character. I don't try to rely on my shield wall to protect me while I channel and throw death bolts, although I could. I choose instead to spend a point of mana and pull out Stun bolt after Stun bolt, opening up enemies for physical attacks by my allies (usually an arrow or a cleave). I'll push people who come close to me. I'll destroy the occasional shield. I'm there to soften the enemy line for my fighters to clean up, not to destroy it outright. Maybe it's that style that I imagine works better against wards like spell block, because I'm not worried if my 1 mana stun gets absorbed, I can cast another twenty of them.
Then again, there's also Wargah, who is also a third level arcane caster. She opts for armor and a sword as her main weapons. I'll keep my mage armors active as best I can to defend me from spells and arrows, ready a Death Bolt to keep enemies at bay or soften them up a bit, then close with a melee weapon. In that situation, I would be wasting a lot of mana and have to fumble to draw a sword against an opponent who should be dead.
The two characters have very different fighting styles, both of which are substantially different than Vazra's. That being said, Shiloh does tend to shy away from combat, though sometimes it can't be avoided. I'm fairly confident you've seen me fight as both mages (I know you've seen Wargah. We Death Bolted an Alpha together. That's a special kind of bond!). Just because a character doesn't enjoy combat or actively seek it out doesn't mean they can't hold their own, and that their opinion on a combat based subject is irrelevant.
|
|
|
Post by Archmage Vazra on May 12, 2016 18:52:33 GMT -5
No, and in your own words, just because a character defers from your two styles doesn't make it any less worth considering. Are we just going to shoehorn all arcane casters into avoiding combat through this update? I'm hearing a point (and accusations towards my own) completely built on hypocrisy. This has never been me dismissing your experiences, and meanwhile we are totally digressing from the topic of balancing these updates. I don't want to argue anybody about the intent of what they said, or make points against each other. I just want to talk about these mechanics, and what a mistake those damn purple necklaces are.
|
|
|
Post by Jopper13 on May 12, 2016 19:15:51 GMT -5
Drake, I recommend that you go back and read Sadie's original post regarding Shiloh; I believe you have missed the point she was making and then mine after that. Shiloh chooses not to engage in direct combat, as in one-on-one or frontline combat... but she still participates in combat. She is in the fight, right next to the fighters, flinging spells at enemies to hinder them or impact the fight. Sadie did not say that she sits back in the tavern and avoids combat entirely... so I don't see any relevancy in you comparing her use of arcane magic similar to how a bartender compares his bartending skills to combat.
I honestly believe you are misunderstanding a number of points that are being discussed here. Please don't take this discussion personal, yes I purposely asked for feedback on this discussion. I did not ask for one-sided feedback, I asked for all feedback, whether players agree or disagree. We have all been throwing in some great ideas and examples to consider, but we all do not have to agree or see eye to eye on this... we debate, defend our views, or debunk others for perspective. If you have feedback or perspective you feel is relevant, then defend it. Support evidence. Give examples. I believe you have already... but I ask that you not dissolve the discussion simply because other people also give feedback, evidence, examples, and believe in something different. This is a big topic with wildly varying opinions... it is going to come to a debate on some of these points.
It disheartens me when you say things like "Players having no say" because why the discussion, the invitation, the playtesting and the request for feedback? I have better things to do with my time than debate arcane magic; if players truly have no say... I would just simply say "This is my game, this the change I am bringing in" and it would be done. But I have chosen to open this up to feedback and discussion. I have also stated multiple times the intent and goal of this discussion, provided numerous examples of expanded feedback and ideas for collaborative discussion, and provided numerous examples of how this balancing system mirrors other aspects of our game. We have players that are mages on both sides of this discussion; it does not matter if you are staff member, a herald, a veteran player, a newbie, or someone who only plays NPCs... this change affects us all, including some of our very own characters (or not, as some players just NPC and it affects their role in an event heavily).
I ask that you take a step back and see the details being provided and continue to add to the discussion; I don't think it is fair to cry foul that your words are being twisted, because you have provided great feedback and come from a different perspective that adds to the mix. That is great! I encourage it! I asked for feedback and opinions... but we all do not need to agree. We always hammer out details like this heavily and look at many angles before making knee-jerk reactions to the game... it is part of that process.
I guess my main point, Drake, is that I would recommend you take a step back to see the big picture and try to not look at this personally, and to truly consider the countless examples being provided. I am not upset at you for having the opinions you have, so I am asking for the same response in kind.
I think we can all benefit from looking at conflicting views and opinions to see if we missed something. I know I am not sticking to one stance and refusing to see others, I am soaking in all aspects of this discussion, so I encourage everyone else to do that as well.
|
|
blueruby
Order of Starkhaven
Plot Staff
Captain Anne Cash
Posts: 924
|
Post by blueruby on May 12, 2016 20:29:28 GMT -5
Alright, back on track: I agree, the conversation has started getting personal in ways that it really shouldn't. On a more objective note, the following are my thoughts on the mechanics we playtested this week: SHIELD WARD: This was entirely too powerful. I really don't have an issue with how Push works in our system, as a mage, as a medium-armor fighter, as a skirmisher, etc. I like how the spell works, and I get some really fun RP out of throwing myself back and away from the fighting. If this effect is going to remain, I would like to see one of two changes made (or something else comparable, I'm open to suggestions). - Remove the duration from the effect. We played with the ward lasting an hour, which basically meant it would stay for the entire scenario. I would like to see this as reduced dramatically, either as a "one and done" effect, or perhaps allowing you to soak a Push with your warded shield, but in exchange you take a Cleave to the shield, giving you a reason to try to avoid the Push or mix and match how things would work.
- Increase the effect. A ward that dissipates the sharp wave of energy that knocks you to the ground would be huge, resulting in a 15 foot knockback and stagger, rather than the same distance and a knock down. Heavily armored fighters would be able to recover significantly faster, and anyone getting Pushed would be able to regain their footing and remain in control far better than being knocked on their back. The 15 feet still gives the mage a chance to ready a defense or run away, but a Stagger instead of a Knock Down would allow the attacker to resume the attack a lot faster, as well.
Either of these would work, but probably not both. I think having both would make the ward simply not worth the substantial effort I would hope was required. SPELL BLOCK: I really did like this. It gave the mages pause in a fight, dragged the fighting on a little longer, and made casters think a little harder about who they were going to try to hit with which spell. I definitely think it needs more play testing to be confirmed, since there were still a number of people who seemed to misunderstand the mechanic (which is entirely understandable, and that's why we test them), but I think a few more runs should give us a better idea of how it works in a fight. I can see the situations where it would be devastating to the mage, but with the high mana cost (we were running with 4 points, which is pretty substantial), I think it balances out pretty nicely and means that people won't be able to simply run back and keep applying the spell block over and over again in a fight. If this is introduced as a new spell (considering recent discussions and new information, I'm in favor of this being added in addition to Mage Armor and Protection), I would like to re-evaluate how we do magical auras, making the recipient choose between what kinds of protection they want. I would personally like to see a single aura be the limit, with the exception being Improved Mage Armor and Improved Protection, which would be able to be stacked with the same spell on the caster in a single aura slot. This means that characters with no magical talent can still opt for a general aura of protection from spells but at the expense of the magical protection from physical attacks like arrows. If I'm in a shield wall, I can talk to a weaver and specifically have them ward my armor or shield against the spell that would make me ineffective, but it still leaves me open to those same physical attacks as well as literally every other spell. It'll be interesting to see how things play out, but I like the angle and would like to see it explored further.
As far as directions for the future, I have a few more proposals for things I would like to see tested out to see how they fit, beyond those listed above in the mechanics we've already been working on. MAGIC RESISTANCE: We already have Disease Resistance and Poison Resistance. We have physical resistance (Toughness), why not a skill that helps mitigate the effects of magic? As I've said before, I'm not a fan of substantially altering the effects of spells, especially ones that are cast in the heat of combat. My proposal for this would be a fairly expensive skill (probably 10xp for all classes), which would half the duration of Stun and Ice Bolts (down to 5 seconds and 15 seconds, respectively), would make any magical ailments we encounter easier for that character to resist, but would also increase the casting time (but not mana cost) of divine healing, as it needs to work a little harder to have the same effect due to the resistance. I think this would be an expensive enough skill, and with the divine magic resistance would be a deterrent against players taking it simply to have another skill, and the beneficial effects could be great as a surprise against a mage in combat, but in reality a 5 second stun is still a good amount of time to run away or prepare another spell, and a 15 second ice bolt would likely be enough to do whatever it is you need to do in that situation. COUNTERSPELL: This was an idea for a spell, possibly removed from either school and able to be taken as a separate skill (probably 5-10xp, class skill for Mage and Cleric). Keep in mind, these are merely my initial suggestions for the spell, not hard rulings. 3 Mana, Purple Spell Bag Counterspell would have two effects, based on whether it is primed or thrown. While Primed: Counterspell will absorb the first spell which affects the caster, similar to a Mage Armor spell. In this case, the wielder of the Counterspell announces ABSORB, drops the primed Counterspell, and ignores all effects of the spell in question. When Thrown: Counterspell STAGGERS the target, as any other spell ball. If the target has a spell primed (including the Flare spell), the spell is lost and unable to be cast. Counterspell bypasses Mage Armor, affecting casters with Mage Armor active as though it weren't there. I would assume spells would follow the same rules as shields do with Shatter Bolt: If the spell is thrown before the Counter is thrown, the spell resolves as normal. If the spell is thrown after Counter is thrown and the Counter strikes the target, the spell would be negated. I still need to figure out tweaks and certain specific situations, but I would be excited to see how it plays out. It would also give mages a more direct way to disrupt other casters, which could be interesting.
I think it's safe to say that as long as we're on topic, the conversation has been enlightening to say the least. I'm curious to know what others think of these ideas, or if you guys have any other proposals you would like to add. Remember, these are suggestions for us to try out at practices and hopefully in ways to simulate their effectiveness in a multitude of situations we might encounter at an event. None of these suggestions have been implemented yet, nor will they be without further testing and conversation, so please keep chiming in, and hopefully we can all (myself especially) keep moving forward towards the end result, an enjoyable experience for everyone.
|
|
|
Post by Archmage Vazra on May 12, 2016 20:41:01 GMT -5
I'm actually quite fond of the counter spell concept. I think this sort of approach calls on more involvement for both parties, which ultimately adds a dynamic and call to interaction to the game over and beyond a passive defense. The difference between this and spell block is it's calling challengers not to simply ignore a spell but to try and do something about it. Rather than removing an aspect of the game, it is inviting interaction.
The proposed magic resistance skill is conceptually interesting in that it imposes a detriment to the user of the skill, which is almost entirely unheard of, but ultimately a fascinating concept. It's always been my opinion that exp penalties don't really balance much, because that really just procrastinates the inevitable, but asking for something in exchange is an entirely different matter, that's a choice to be made with definitive pro's and con's. The downside to this idea is that it again falls into passive mechanics and I'd agree with Sadie, things get a little wonky when the same spell has a different effect on different people, especially when there is no visible aura to distinguish.
|
|
|
Post by mendicantmedic on May 12, 2016 23:15:48 GMT -5
I have a question regarding the proposed spell resistance auras. Is the purple proving sufficiently distinct from blue and red? While it's thematically appropriate, considering the class of magic involved, it might cause some confusion in a melee where no one knows who might be carrying what. Something like green or orange might be more distinct.
I like the idea of counterspell packets! Would they be representing spells, skills, or maybe alchemical flechettes?
|
|
blueruby
Order of Starkhaven
Plot Staff
Captain Anne Cash
Posts: 924
|
Post by blueruby on May 13, 2016 6:09:36 GMT -5
In my personal experience, yes they are distinct enough. We also currently use green to represent a Weaver aura against acid bolt, and red (which would encounter the same issues with orange beads) for a shatter bolt protection. The purple beads, from what I've seen, are clear enough at a distance to show that the enemy has an aura active, and clearly discernible in decent lighting to be distinctly purple by the time you get within the effective range of a spell. Good question, though! We don't want people getting confused, because confusion is over of the fastest ways to lead to frustration and at the end of the day, we're all here to have fun!
As for the counter spell, I would picture it as a skill to weave mana in such a way that it will disrupt the flow of other mana and deconstruct the weave holding a spell together. How the player flavors that would be a little more up to player discretion as long as it fits the scope of the world and makes sense logically.
|
|
|
Post by Archmage Vazra on May 13, 2016 9:48:39 GMT -5
It would be curious if counterspell had a requirement of either: Arcane magic, divine magic, or Trade: Alchemy. Maybe those are unnecessary though, since it requires mana. I'd actually be kind of interested in seeing somebody taking mana reserves to use this, without taking any other spells. This opens up some interesting roleplay angles, you could make a pacifist character who still involved themselves in combat using this.
|
|
|
Post by ClypeumLegis on May 13, 2016 9:53:35 GMT -5
I'm liking these ideas as well. I think that they all deserve a good comprehensive rundown so that we can see what they look like.
|
|
blueruby
Order of Starkhaven
Plot Staff
Captain Anne Cash
Posts: 924
|
Post by blueruby on May 13, 2016 11:02:54 GMT -5
I'm personally not sure about alchemy as a potential requirement, since I don't believe the potions are actually magical in nature.
I would say that any magical lore skill (arcane, divine, ritual, or witch) would be required, then the skill would be usable by anyone with sufficient mana to cast it
|
|
|
Post by ClypeumLegis on May 13, 2016 11:08:19 GMT -5
Agreed on the nature of alchemy. From what I understand, it is the combination of physical reagents(mostly plants) to make potions that have effects that depend on the reagents. Nowhere is magic involved in the alchemy process.
I would think that the Counterspell would be its own skill kind of like Transcendent Meditation, with a magic lore prerequisite to use it. That would be a good way to ensure that there's a prerequisite of magic knowledge to be able to use it.
|
|
|
Post by Jopper13 on May 13, 2016 11:13:26 GMT -5
I am honestly more in favor of seeing Counterspell be a new spell for Arcane Magic and not a skill people can take. We already have Spell Return and Transcendent Meditation as additional skills for magic, so I am not sure about making more. As people have stated already, Magic is indeed an exp sink so requiring more is something I am concerned about. I am also not sure about allowing Divine casters to throw counter spells; divine and arcane magic works so differently in our system it wouldn't follow the same theme. I see the Counterspell as throwing a bolt that "trips the arcane circuit breaker: and fizzles the spell, which is still a tricky process using arcane magic. It doesn't feel right to me to allow Divine casters to do the same.
In the same topic, we have literally nothing that Divine casters can do to protect against arcane magic except for casting Sanctuary. I think if we build in some sort of "anti magic barrier" or a "if I am touching you and have this X spell active, I will absorb the spell and not you" seems to follow the theme of self-sacrifice of Divine magic.
As for the possible Magic Resistance skill, I really like the idea behind it but I am worried about the balancing. It seems too "underwhelming" to just reduce Stun or Ice Bolt by half but then double all divine healing times. If it *only* changes Stun and Ice bolt, I would say it makes you immune to the time instead of half. For example, you get hit with a Stun Bolt/Ice Bolt, stagger, and announce "Resist" and keep going instead of being stunned or locked down in place. I think this is better balancing, because while you can shrug off the effects of a Stun or Paralyzing spell, you can still have holes ripped in your body and your equipment destroyed. We have effects in the game which have made people immune to all magic in the past, so it does exist in our game/lore... so a minor form of it hinting at this resistance/immunity would be kind of neat.
These are the summarized ideas I would love to analyze and playtest, pulled from most of the ideas presented in this discussion so far:
Spell Block - Purple bead aura. Already covered above, currently being playtested.
Magic Resistance - Skill that somehow slows down magic effects/dampens them... not sure how to balance. Ideas are posted above.
Mage Armor - Open up to be able to be cast on others. No change mechanically.
Counterspell Bolt - Detailed above. A tweak should be added that if a mage is "returning a spell" and hit with it, they lose any remaining mana being returned. If a mage with a death bolt sees a counter spell and they start returning the mana and get to 3 and then are struck with Counterspell, the remaining 5 mana is lost.
Arcane Barrier - Similar to divine barrier, but creates an aura of magic resistance or forces any spell used in that barrier to target the holder of the barrier. May be wonky but could be interesting if balanced right... not likely a great option but worth a shot. We have Divine and Profane barriers already, so the "barrier" typeof magic is very consistent in our game.
Magic Intervention - Divine spell, primed like a flare in one hand... other hand is placed on an ally. If a spell targets that ally, it conducts through and slams into the divine caster, either damaging them or knocking them back or just impacting/influencing them instead. Similar to how chaining hands together and touching an electrical fence means the person on the end gets the main zap.
Thoughts? Did I miss any? (Compiling the main ideas gives us a list of things to analyze, test, and either implement or dismiss)
|
|
|
Post by Archmage Vazra on May 13, 2016 11:15:10 GMT -5
I like counterspell requiring a magical lore skill as a prerequisite. The concept makes sense, and mechanically it provides a chance to get more millage out of those skills. I'm fine with it just being included in Arcane Magic though. Maybe both trees could have it, Arcane at level 1, Divine at level 2 or 3?
|
|
|
Post by ClypeumLegis on May 13, 2016 11:16:14 GMT -5
Liking all this plan.
|
|
|
Post by Archmage Vazra on May 13, 2016 11:20:32 GMT -5
I like the concept of "Magical intervention" assuming that the cleric absorbing the spell still takes damage. We could give Arcane Magic "Counterspell" and Divine Magic "Magical intervention". This fits both thematically and both options are still active interaction, they're asking for participation over adding an arbitrary passive null.
Would the cleric using "magical intervention" take full damage if the spell hit them directly?
"Magical Resistance" seems like it would be really powerful if it just made you immune to those spells, and really kind of confusing if there's no visible cue before hand. Maybe it could convert Ice Bolt and Stun Bolt into a Push effect? Seems kind of wonky.
|
|