Official Message Boards of the Darkon Wargaming Club, Inc.

Garb, Feb 12th

General chatter about the Club and Realm of Darkon

Re: Garb, Feb 12th

Postby Lord Valfryn » 2012-02-22

Last edited by Lord Valfryn on 2012-02-22, edited 1 time in total.
Image
User avatar
Lord Valfryn
Knight of the Realm
 
Posts: 759
Joined: 2012-01-10
Location: The Bloodspire Mountains

Re: Garb, Feb 12th

Postby Taggart MacBannion » 2012-02-22

Woo broken link
- Taggart MacBannion

Quartermaster of the Bendorian Lifeguard
User avatar
Taggart MacBannion
Darkonian
 
Posts: 80
Joined: 2012-02-01
Location: Paledor

Re: Garb, Feb 12th

Postby Lord Valfryn » 2012-02-22

There, I fixed it.
Image
Image
User avatar
Lord Valfryn
Knight of the Realm
 
Posts: 759
Joined: 2012-01-10
Location: The Bloodspire Mountains

Re: Garb, Feb 12th

Postby Sir Gwydion » 2012-02-22

-Inox- wrote:It's always nice to see how I have so much support in my own country.


Wait a second, YOU proposed that? I would never have thought that you would propose something that greatly changed the rules to shape the game in a way that is arbitrarily different from the way it was.

I also never would have imagined that you would take an idea like Magic Missile, which would have been a perfectly good level 1 spell, and turn it into something MORE complicated by dropping it outside the spell point progression, moving forward your personal agenda against the Vancian system of spellcasting, while still maintaining that you do what you do for the benefit of the game as a whole, and with an eye towards simplicity.

But hey, I guess it WAS you. I wonder if your country voted for that.
Sir Gwydion, Baron of Gladesedge
Sometime mistaken for Avlis, Ranger of the Woods of Elidor (also of Gladesedge)
User avatar
Sir Gwydion
Knight of the Realm
 
Posts: 115
Joined: 2012-01-16

Re: Garb, Feb 12th

Postby Inox » 2012-02-22

Sir Gwydion wrote:
-Inox- wrote:It's always nice to see how I have so much support in my own country.


Wait a second, YOU proposed that? I would never have thought that you would propose something that greatly changed the rules to shape the game in a way that is arbitrarily different from the way it was.


There was nothing arbitrary about it.

Removing non-prop spell components was a change almost everyone welcomed, as having a square of parchment or lens or ring in one's bag that never had to be taken out or used in any way was, quite simply, silly. Now, all casters either have a prop (spellball, cape, etc.), or they have a token of their ability to cast.


Sir Gwydion wrote:I also never would have imagined that you would take an idea like Magic Missile, which would have been a perfectly good level 1 spell, and turn it into something MORE complicated by dropping it outside the spell point progression, moving forward your personal agenda against the Vancian system of spellcasting, while still maintaining that you do what you do for the benefit of the game as a whole, and with an eye towards simplicity.


If the spell required spell points, it would be used not at all. You also miss entirely the whole point of the spell, which is to give arcane casters something low-powered that they can always cast. Again, a pretty well-liked idea.

Let me ask you a really simple question: Can I not dislike & seek to alter Vancian casting holdovers because I believe it doesn't work best in a game like this?

But no, you'd rather phrase it as if I lie about my motivations. Duly noted.



Sir Gwydion wrote:But hey, I guess it WAS you. I wonder if your country voted for that.


Elidor voted 'yes' on the vast majority of it, despite us not taking a vote as a country to determine the Senators' votes.
Prince Inox Elsonáge Thensiur
Swordslinger of No Quarter!
½ Drow Paladin of BABALON
Warriors Guild, KR, OSW, CCx5
••• With Emptiness, With Instinct, With Impurity, and Will •••
Glory unto the Scarlet Woman, Babalon the Mother of Abominations, that rideth upon the Beast
User avatar
Inox
Treasurer
 
Posts: 556
Joined: 2012-01-09

Re: Garb, Feb 12th

Postby fingers630 » 2012-02-22

While disagreeing with Inox on a great many things, I did agree that having a small piece of paper and a magnifying glass for my spells was pretty pointless. I also happen to like Magic Missile and don't mind it costing 0 spell points. Higher level casters will be using fireball or lightning bolt, and low level casters can actually be useful.
Justicar Lucius Alexander Crum
Archmage of Elidor and Lord of the Realm
Queen of the Silly People

______________________________________________________________________
"I'll grapple with greasy fingers... Just sayin'..."-Thrush
User avatar
fingers630
Moderator
 
Posts: 1514
Joined: 2012-01-11
Location: In his Anti Magic Pants

Re: Garb, Feb 12th

Postby TitusV » 2012-02-22

Can someone define Vancian spellcasting? Who is this dude?
User avatar
TitusV
Darkonian
 
Posts: 114
Joined: 2012-01-10
Location: Gaul

Re: Garb, Feb 12th

Postby Inox » 2012-02-22

TitusV wrote:Can someone define Vancian spellcasting? Who is this dude?



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dying_Earth

Scroll down to the Influence section.
Prince Inox Elsonáge Thensiur
Swordslinger of No Quarter!
½ Drow Paladin of BABALON
Warriors Guild, KR, OSW, CCx5
••• With Emptiness, With Instinct, With Impurity, and Will •••
Glory unto the Scarlet Woman, Babalon the Mother of Abominations, that rideth upon the Beast
User avatar
Inox
Treasurer
 
Posts: 556
Joined: 2012-01-09

Re: Garb, Feb 12th

Postby TitusV » 2012-02-22

I read that and am still unclear. The part where magic users forget their spells once used is considered vancian and that translates to spell points in Darkon?
User avatar
TitusV
Darkonian
 
Posts: 114
Joined: 2012-01-10
Location: Gaul

Re: Garb, Feb 12th

Postby Lord Dubh » 2012-02-22

TitusV wrote:I read that and am still unclear. The part where magic users forget their spells once used is considered vancian and that translates to spell points in Darkon?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magic_%28gaming%29

Vancian is memorization and loss. We are a point based system. I never got it either but just easier to go with it.
Sir Bendore Dubh of Dai-Dagan, CR, KR, OG, OR, CB, CC
Master Thief of Darkon


____

http://www.facebook.com/SirBendoreDubh/
User avatar
Lord Dubh
Knight of the Realm
 
Posts: 717
Joined: 2012-01-06
Location: Tarimstadt

Re: Garb, Feb 12th

Postby Inox » 2012-02-23

Yeah, Vancian is specfically memorization & loss. That was the core of the 1st edition D&D (Advanced Dungeons & Dragons, it was called) spellcasting system.

Darkon borrowed very, very heavily from AD&D; our relic names, many of our spell names, Clerics not being able to use edged/pointed weapons, etc.

However, when Darkon started, Mages had just 4 ranks of spells, with one or two at each rank. Three spellball spells in the whole game: Lightning Bolt, Ice Storm, Fireball (2nd, 3rd, & 4th rank, respectively). So, with so few spells, having to "pick" ahead of time was silly. Accordingly, they did what a lot of AD&D players had been doing via houserules, and went with a "mana" or Spell Point system.

However, the whole Spell Point concept directly grew out of the Vancian mechanic; the idea that you only have so much you can do in one given day before a rest period, and then you are magically "out of ammo".

In recent years, the concept has fallen out of favor with game designers. Ultimately, it translates best into tabletop, for one simple reason: You can speed up the boring parts. If you are done for the day, you "make camp", throw some random encounter rolls, and BOOM, you wake up the next day and choose your next compliment of spells. In actual player time, maybe this was a few minutes...maybe even a brief mention.

However, with LARPs and MMOs, the action is continuous. This is why in virtually every fantasy MMO, casters have mana that regenerates over time very quickly, so you are really only limited to what you can do in a specific combat. In fact, the only MMO I can think of where that was not the case was the DDO (D&D Online) one, and that hasn't exactly been a roaring success...they even had to make it free to play.

Even the tabletop D&D has moved away from Vancian mechanics more and more. They just lend themselves toward feast & famine styles of play: hoard the mana and interact minimally, then dump it like mad and overshadow all else. Hard to balance. In D&D 3.5, it was easy for casters to have a few "atomic bombs", but it wasn't easy to put in a balanced effort every fight.

They've gone a long way to remedy this in 4.0, and I think that by the time 5 comes out, we'll see the Vancian elements gone entirely.

My philosophy on game design (and I think a lot of current designers share this view) is that anything you can do as a character, you should be able to do all the time. If it's something so powerful that it has to be limited to X times a day, it's probably too powerful.

If this point seems of questionable validity, think about how the power of magic in our game (and any game: tabletop, MMO, LARP, whatever) is entirely arbitrary. Therefore, a point of balance is for us to define. Obviously, there is a point where it is too much. If caster could, with a 3 second "I SLAY YOU RIGHT NOW WITH FINGER OF DEATH!" recitation, kill a player by pointing at them, it would be ridiculous.

Time Stop was also pretty ridiculous.

It would seem almost crazy to newer Darkonians of today, but there was a time when almost every Adventure or Campout seemed to end with Time Stop. What a horrible, anticlimactic downbeat ending. Unheroic in the extreme.

Ideally, what seems to me to be the most fun for the largest number of players (and again, where most game designers seem to be going) is in creating systems where casters and martial types both fight continually, at comparable levels of power, while accomplishing different objectives for the group.

That is, everyone has a job to do, they do it continuously, and it's a dynamic where no one completely overshadows or dominates based on their class abilities. This is not a hard thing to accomplish, really, in terms of rules structure.

The hard part is in getting people to embrace change in a system where, really, we should all just be trying to have fun.
Prince Inox Elsonáge Thensiur
Swordslinger of No Quarter!
½ Drow Paladin of BABALON
Warriors Guild, KR, OSW, CCx5
••• With Emptiness, With Instinct, With Impurity, and Will •••
Glory unto the Scarlet Woman, Babalon the Mother of Abominations, that rideth upon the Beast
User avatar
Inox
Treasurer
 
Posts: 556
Joined: 2012-01-09

Re: Garb, Feb 12th

Postby TitusV » 2012-02-23

Ok I understand your explanation and agree with the logic. I think it would be neat to try to evolve but it would be difficult. I think you can do it by seriously adjusting spell word counts. Making the least powerful spells shorter and spells like fireball longer. But that is another discussion.
User avatar
TitusV
Darkonian
 
Posts: 114
Joined: 2012-01-10
Location: Gaul

Re: Garb, Feb 12th

Postby Sir Gwydion » 2012-02-23

-Inox- wrote:Yeah, Vancian is specfically memorization & loss. That was the core of the 1st edition D&D (Advanced Dungeons & Dragons, it was called) spellcasting system.

Darkon borrowed very, very heavily from AD&D; our relic names, many of our spell names, Clerics not being able to use edged/pointed weapons, etc.

However, when Darkon started, Mages had just 4 ranks of spells, with one or two at each rank. Three spellball spells in the whole game: Lightning Bolt, Ice Storm, Fireball (2nd, 3rd, & 4th rank, respectively). So, with so few spells, having to "pick" ahead of time was silly. Accordingly, they did what a lot of AD&D players had been doing via houserules, and went with a "mana" or Spell Point system.

However, the whole Spell Point concept directly grew out of the Vancian mechanic; the idea that you only have so much you can do in one given day before a rest period, and then you are magically "out of ammo".

In recent years, the concept has fallen out of favor with game designers. Ultimately, it translates best into tabletop, for one simple reason: You can speed up the boring parts. If you are done for the day, you "make camp", throw some random encounter rolls, and BOOM, you wake up the next day and choose your next compliment of spells. In actual player time, maybe this was a few minutes...maybe even a brief mention.

However, with LARPs and MMOs, the action is continuous. This is why in virtually every fantasy MMO, casters have mana that regenerates over time very quickly, so you are really only limited to what you can do in a specific combat. In fact, the only MMO I can think of where that was not the case was the DDO (D&D Online) one, and that hasn't exactly been a roaring success...they even had to make it free to play.

Even the tabletop D&D has moved away from Vancian mechanics more and more. They just lend themselves toward feast & famine styles of play: hoard the mana and interact minimally, then dump it like mad and overshadow all else. Hard to balance. In D&D 3.5, it was easy for casters to have a few "atomic bombs", but it wasn't easy to put in a balanced effort every fight.

They've gone a long way to remedy this in 4.0, and I think that by the time 5 comes out, we'll see the Vancian elements gone entirely.

My philosophy on game design (and I think a lot of current designers share this view) is that anything you can do as a character, you should be able to do all the time. If it's something so powerful that it has to be limited to X times a day, it's probably too powerful.

If this point seems of questionable validity, think about how the power of magic in our game (and any game: tabletop, MMO, LARP, whatever) is entirely arbitrary. Therefore, a point of balance is for us to define. Obviously, there is a point where it is too much. If caster could, with a 3 second "I SLAY YOU RIGHT NOW WITH FINGER OF DEATH!" recitation, kill a player by pointing at them, it would be ridiculous.

Time Stop was also pretty ridiculous.

It would seem almost crazy to newer Darkonians of today, but there was a time when almost every Adventure or Campout seemed to end with Time Stop. What a horrible, anticlimactic downbeat ending. Unheroic in the extreme.

Ideally, what seems to me to be the most fun for the largest number of players (and again, where most game designers seem to be going) is in creating systems where casters and martial types both fight continually, at comparable levels of power, while accomplishing different objectives for the group.

That is, everyone has a job to do, they do it continuously, and it's a dynamic where no one completely overshadows or dominates based on their class abilities. This is not a hard thing to accomplish, really, in terms of rules structure.

The hard part is in getting people to embrace change in a system where, really, we should all just be trying to have fun.


I disagree with the concept that everyone's job should be done continuously. I think it makes sense for someone to be able to keep their arbitrary abilities in check for a prescribed amount of time in order to make them more useful when needed.

Switching to a continuous system vanillas out all of the character's abilities (and this has been seen in most MMOs) where all abilities between the classes are parallel. Class A has more healing, and less damage. Class B has more damage and less healing. Everyone can do everything.

What makes Darkon interesting and great is that class selection within a unit or a country can accomplish an entirely different feel based solely on the abilities of the characters. If BAMC showed up as a band of wizards for a campout, it would be a totally different group than they are today. However, if they showed up as a band of wizards but wizard abilities were similar to Druid abilities or Fighter abilities, then they would pretty much be what they are today.

The tweaked Vancian mechanic we used with spell points is like the DnD 4th mechanic of a Daily Power whereby someone can hold a majority of their spell points until the end of the day and blow their wad. Spell lengths limit the amount of times a spell can be used per encounter, which makes them like Encounter Powers. Continuous powers are called "Swords" or "Flails" in our game, although we have recently added Magic Missile to this.

If we think that a particular spell affects the game too much per encounter, lengthen the words. If we think that spellcasters are waiting until the end of events to participate, well, they're probably not having fun, so they're self-limiting in a way. But if you think that they get to blow their wad with particular spells, you can up the cost of spellcasting in terms of spell points.

I can tell you my ranger spells are pretty uber powerful, since I can cast Cure Light Wounds 41 times a day. Maybe it would make sense for Rangers to cast CLW at 2 spell points and keep Clerics and Druids at 1 sp, making it more favorable to have them cast low level cure spells. At the same time, CSW can be 2 sp, CMW can be 3 sp and Res can be 4 sp.

There, uber res-battle problem solved, and it makes higher level clerics more awesome.

Do the same thing for Fireball if you're so freaked out about it.

But you don't have to change the whole system, especially when it's so freaking easy to just count down your spell points during a day!
Sir Gwydion, Baron of Gladesedge
Sometime mistaken for Avlis, Ranger of the Woods of Elidor (also of Gladesedge)
User avatar
Sir Gwydion
Knight of the Realm
 
Posts: 115
Joined: 2012-01-16

Re: Garb, Feb 12th

Postby Inox » 2012-02-23

Sir Gwydion wrote:I disagree with the concept that everyone's job should be done continuously. I think it makes sense for someone to be able to keep their arbitrary abilities in check for a prescribed amount of time in order to make them more useful when needed.


Well, we are going to have to disagree, there. I think the goal should be for player participation to be very continuous, regardless of role/class. It's a game; playing it fully and interactively is the whole point.



Sir Gwydion wrote:Switching to a continuous system vanillas out all of the character's abilities (and this has been seen in most MMOs) where all abilities between the classes are parallel. Class A has more healing, and less damage. Class B has more damage and less healing. Everyone can do everything.


Except that that's not true.

If you look at even the most popular MMO, World of Warcraft, you have roles that not everyone can perform equally. You need someone to heal, someone to be the heavy armored person and soak damage, someone to deal out lots of damage (often ranged, via spells or missile), and someone to manage "crowd control". Often several someones in each role.

This is even an oversimplification, as there are hybrid & secondary elements. http://www.wowwiki.com/Group_Roles

But even beyond that, there are only certain character that can address diseases, others that can deal with curses, only a few that can use wands or poisons, while others get heavier armor, etc. There's a huge amount of variance in what one can do, use, etc. However, they all get to participate all of the time. It's not, "Oh, Mage...yeah, we need you to not cast too much for the first few dungeons we do today, so you'll be worth a damn in the final climactic battle."


What makes Darkon interesting and great is that class selection within a unit or a country can accomplish an entirely different feel based solely on the abilities of the characters. If BAMC showed up as a band of wizards for a campout, it would be a totally different group than they are today. However, if they showed up as a band of wizards but wizard abilities were similar to Druid abilities or Fighter abilities, then they would pretty much be what they are today.

What makes Darkon interesting and great is not class abilities. It's people fighting and role-playing.

The class abilities are supposed to be there to add flavor and options...both of which tend to increase overall enjoyability. To that end, magic should be just another option, no better or worse than any other class choice; not something intermittently overpowering (and/or a cause for "resource shepherding" that inhibits actual gameplay).


The tweaked Vancian mechanic we used with spell points is like the DnD 4th mechanic of a Daily Power whereby someone can hold a majority of their spell points until the end of the day and blow their wad. Spell lengths limit the amount of times a spell can be used per encounter, which makes them like Encounter Powers. Continuous powers are called "Swords" or "Flails" in our game, although we have recently added Magic Missile to this.

I have to disagree.

Daily powers are not of such great scale that they equate to a spell point dump. While they conceded to Vance fans with the idea of Daily (and, to a lesser extent, Encounter) powers, the Daily powers are way, way less significant than what you could accomplish under 3.5 with metamagic. They evened out the power curve quite well in 4.0, and I expect in 5 it will be such that the idea of Daily can be removed entirely.

Since I like examples, check this from 4.0:

Difference between most-damaging Warlock spell at 1st level & 30th: 40 HP
Difference between Fighter HP at 1st level and 30th level (approximately): 180

The most a Warlock at can do at 30th is 70 plus bonuses. Even with crazy ability scores, the best feats, and every class item in the book, good luck getting much over 100. Optimization can only do so much.

The game-breaking atomic bombs were a possibility under 3.5:

Incantatrix Wizard @ 20:

Feats: Arcane Thesis, Empower, Energy Admixture, Energy Substitution, Maximize, Twin Spell, Easy Metamagic for the last 4, Iron Will, Quicken Spell

Cast Orb of Fire (4th level spell, 15D6) using the above metamagic & prestige class (and then Instant Metamagic or a 9th level slot to Quicken one):

Empowered, Maximized, Twinned, Admixtured Orb of Fire: 8th level spell, 540 HP damage…can do it twice in one round (one Quickened)…so 1080 HP in one round.

Note that this is at level TWENTY (20), not 30. It doesn't even include Epic Feats and all that nonsense.

Now, I would never play like that, but it should not be possible under the rules.


Sir Gwydion wrote:If we think that a particular spell affects the game too much per encounter, lengthen the words. If we think that spellcasters are waiting until the end of events to participate, well, they're probably not having fun, so they're self-limiting in a way. But if you think that they get to blow their wad with particular spells, you can up the cost of spellcasting in terms of spell points.


Or, we could lengthen the problem spells and simply not use spell points. Make it harder to dump Fireball, and Fireball is instantly less of an issue. I mean, it would work the other way, too; if Fireball took 5 seconds to cast, it would be way too overpowering even given current spell point limitations.

Also, the system we use should not encourage (and definitely not reward, by any means, strategic or otherwise) non-participation.


Sir Gwydion wrote:I can tell you my ranger spells are pretty uber powerful, since I can cast Cure Light Wounds 41 times a day. Maybe it would make sense for Rangers to cast CLW at 2 spell points and keep Clerics and Druids at 1 sp, making it more favorable to have them cast low level cure spells. At the same time, CSW can be 2 sp, CMW can be 3 sp and Res can be 4 sp.

There, uber res-battle problem solved, and it makes higher level clerics more awesome.

Do the same thing for Fireball if you're so freaked out about it.

But you don't have to change the whole system, especially when it's so freaking easy to just count down your spell points during a day!


Actually, spell point counting has often been a problem, and it's one of the hardest areas to detect cheaters.

Besides that, though, I don't think Rangers curing Light wounds has really been a balance issue for anyone, ever, at any time. It's the big spells (some of the ones 7th rank and above, generally) that are at issue.

In fact, I'd go so far as to say that right now, almost any spell under 7th rank (with the exception of Mending) could probably be cast nonstop all day with no spell points, and we'd hardly notice a difference.
Prince Inox Elsonáge Thensiur
Swordslinger of No Quarter!
½ Drow Paladin of BABALON
Warriors Guild, KR, OSW, CCx5
••• With Emptiness, With Instinct, With Impurity, and Will •••
Glory unto the Scarlet Woman, Babalon the Mother of Abominations, that rideth upon the Beast
User avatar
Inox
Treasurer
 
Posts: 556
Joined: 2012-01-09

Re: Garb, Feb 12th

Postby Sir Tyriel Firebrand » 2012-02-23

I kinda like what Inox is saying, but I think I see what Gwydion is saying as well. I think it would be awesome to find a balanced way for every class to do what they do all the time and still be part of the dynamic of class. To be honest, picking a class is kind of a strategic dynamic in itself. For example, a mage can stand in the back and buff the frontline melee fighters with protect spells or they can be artillery for the team. Druids can do the same, but they can mix up being flankers or casters, instead of frontline tanks. I know this is kind of a MMO way to look at stuff, but I think that if we balanced it it would still be different.

I know that cormac had a cool concept for spell casting awhile back, why don't we revisit that?

*Ninjed by inox lol.
~No Quarter!~
~Warriors Guild~
~Knight of Tuesday~
~"Winning is teaching, losing is learning"~
User avatar
Sir Tyriel Firebrand
Vice President
 
Posts: 368
Joined: 2012-01-26

Re: Garb, Feb 12th

Postby ylinett » 2012-02-23

Many of the above issues can be addressed by the way in which Adventures are written. I encourage anyone who is serious about making things more fun to volunteer. So far not one of you (outside of John's crew) has stepped up for this campout.
Thane of the Northern Kingdoms
Warrior and Brehon of Albion
Lord of the Realm and Knight of Tuesday
OG OR OS OD CC CB CS
ylinett
Darkonian
 
Posts: 139
Joined: 2012-01-11

Re: Garb, Feb 12th

Postby Inox » 2012-02-23

Yes, I have not stepped up for this campout. That has nothing to do with what I am saying here.

Also, I dislike the idea of balancing things by context. Rules should be inherently balanced.

There are few things more annoying and hamfisted than a DM whose idea of balance is continually engineering circumstances where the player's key thing can't come into play. "Oh, bad news fire mage...looks like more efreet for you to battle!"

The better solution is to balance things in the rules, inherently, so people can be creative with adventures in an artistic sense...rather than spending time figuring out how to contain the nukes.
Prince Inox Elsonáge Thensiur
Swordslinger of No Quarter!
½ Drow Paladin of BABALON
Warriors Guild, KR, OSW, CCx5
••• With Emptiness, With Instinct, With Impurity, and Will •••
Glory unto the Scarlet Woman, Babalon the Mother of Abominations, that rideth upon the Beast
User avatar
Inox
Treasurer
 
Posts: 556
Joined: 2012-01-09

Re: Garb, Feb 12th

Postby Inox » 2012-02-23

Sir Tyriel Firebrand wrote:I kinda like what Inox is saying, but I think I see what Gwydion is saying as well. I think it would be awesome to find a balanced way for every class to do what they do all the time and still be part of the dynamic of class. To be honest, picking a class is kind of a strategic dynamic in itself. For example, a mage can stand in the back and buff the frontline melee fighters with protect spells or they can be artillery for the team. Druids can do the same, but they can mix up being flankers or casters, instead of frontline tanks. I know this is kind of a MMO way to look at stuff, but I think that if we balanced it it would still be different.


Yes, and I think that's a good strategic dynamic. There is nothing inherently wrong with the MMO angle; they have very balanced, very enjoyable mechanics. The only thing we'd want to make sure we had was more RP.


Sir Tyriel Firebrand wrote:I know that cormac had a cool concept for spell casting awhile back, why don't we revisit that?


Refresh my recollection?
Prince Inox Elsonáge Thensiur
Swordslinger of No Quarter!
½ Drow Paladin of BABALON
Warriors Guild, KR, OSW, CCx5
••• With Emptiness, With Instinct, With Impurity, and Will •••
Glory unto the Scarlet Woman, Babalon the Mother of Abominations, that rideth upon the Beast
User avatar
Inox
Treasurer
 
Posts: 556
Joined: 2012-01-09

Re: Garb, Feb 12th

Postby jayjay » 2012-02-23

-Inox- wrote:The better solution is to balance things in the rules, inherently, so people can be creative with adventures in an artistic sense...rather than spending time figuring out how to contain the nukes.


this is the proper way to go about it, imho, but how do we implement it? mmo's do with a role systems (tanks, heals, dps). DnD seems to be going this way. amtgard balanced in the past (i haven't followed the new rule stuff close enough to know how it will be done in the future) on a rock paper scissor system, as do many rts games.

the biggest balance problem that combat based larps face (darkon, amt, dag, bel, etc) is player skill. our games aren't as munchkinable as something like nero is thankfully. however, one really talented fighter that prefers one class to another can make it seem like that class is OP.

what i'm basically saying, is i think inox's post has isolated the problem, but how does the realm want to go about fixing it?
jayjay
No Quarter!
jayjay
Darkonian
 
Posts: 163
Joined: 2012-01-17

Re: Garb, Feb 12th

Postby Sir Tyriel Firebrand » 2012-02-24

Sir Tyriel Firebrand wrote:I know that cormac had a cool concept for spell casting awhile back, why don't we revisit that?


Refresh my recollection?[/quote]

It was something about sustenance or some such. You can only have a certain amount of spells active and it effects your casting. If you have 7 points to spread out at once, but your shield and steelskin take up 5 of it. Fireball takes three sustenance to cast, so you would need to drop an active spell to cast it. It was something like that, I thought it was pretty cool.
~No Quarter!~
~Warriors Guild~
~Knight of Tuesday~
~"Winning is teaching, losing is learning"~
User avatar
Sir Tyriel Firebrand
Vice President
 
Posts: 368
Joined: 2012-01-26

Re: Garb, Feb 12th

Postby PadreCaedes » 2012-02-24

If that's the idea for sustenance, I love that idea.
Warmaster Caedes, Kinslayer
Knight of Ched Nasad
Patron Father of House LeDouche

High Priest of Ched Nasad
Vicar of the Church of Khorne
Steward of NorthHold
House Ledouche: "We Bow to No Man...Because We Can't"
User avatar
PadreCaedes
Darkonian
 
Posts: 126
Joined: 2012-01-16
Location: Temple of Khorne

Re: Garb, Feb 12th

Postby Sir Gwydion » 2012-02-24

-Inox- wrote:
Sir Gwydion wrote:Switching to a continuous system vanillas out all of the character's abilities (and this has been seen in most MMOs) where all abilities between the classes are parallel. Class A has more healing, and less damage. Class B has more damage and less healing. Everyone can do everything.


Except that that's not true.

If you look at even the most popular MMO, World of Warcraft, you have roles that not everyone can perform equally. You need someone to heal, someone to be the heavy armored person and soak damage, someone to deal out lots of damage (often ranged, via spells or missile), and someone to manage "crowd control". Often several someones in each role.

This is even an oversimplification, as there are hybrid & secondary elements. http://www.wowwiki.com/Group_Roles


I simply don't have the time to respond to your essay today, but I will point this out. In your provided link, please reference the following lines with regards to which class would be optimal for each of these roles:

Death Knights, Warriors, Druids, and Paladins are often time the main tank.

In addition to the classes listed for main tanking, Shaman and Hunters are good off tanks as they have mail armor and some high aggro attacks, ideal for distracting mobs until the tank can regain aggro.

Correctly specced these four classes can serve as the main healer: Priests, Druids, Paladins and Shaman.

The Priest, Druid, Paladin, and Shaman are all capable of being secondary healers.

Mages and Hunters are brought for crowd control since they can Polymorph and Freezing Trap, respectively. Rogues, Druids, Priests, and Warlocks are less desirable because their crowd control techniques are much more situational.

All classes can effectively fill the role of damage dealer.


I'm not getting how this refutes my argument that in an MMO, classes share spheres of influence and often overlap with each other. There are 4 or more classes listed as optimal for each of these roles. How many classes are there in WoW, anyway? We have 10. If 4 classes could do the same job for all our roles based on their abilities, then we might as well get rid of Warrior Mage, because it adds complexity to the game and fits no EXCLUSIVE role.

I mean, you produced Warrior Mage to fill a gap in our ability sets, right?
Sir Gwydion, Baron of Gladesedge
Sometime mistaken for Avlis, Ranger of the Woods of Elidor (also of Gladesedge)
User avatar
Sir Gwydion
Knight of the Realm
 
Posts: 115
Joined: 2012-01-16

Re: Garb, Feb 12th

Postby Lord Dubh » 2012-02-24

Using terms like tank, heals or DPS when talking about a purely PvP LIVE ACTION game is pretty useless in my mind. No one is casting heals during combat (its almost always AFTER), DPS is not relevant at all since we don't have attack speeds standardized, and tank us only useful if you have agro managment which doesn't exist in PvP or Live Action.

Not sure that fits with this conversation...just felt I needed to say it.
Sir Bendore Dubh of Dai-Dagan, CR, KR, OG, OR, CB, CC
Master Thief of Darkon


____

http://www.facebook.com/SirBendoreDubh/
User avatar
Lord Dubh
Knight of the Realm
 
Posts: 717
Joined: 2012-01-06
Location: Tarimstadt

Re: Garb, Feb 12th

Postby Inox » 2012-02-24

Sir Gwydion wrote:I'm not getting how this refutes my argument that in an MMO, classes share spheres of influence and often overlap with each other.


Except that's not the argument you made.

YOU said: "Switching to a continuous system vanillas out all of the character's abilities (and this has been seen in most MMOs) where all abilities between the classes are parallel. Class A has more healing, and less damage. Class B has more damage and less healing. Everyone can do everything."

Emphasis added. Sure, multiple people can fill a role of healer, but some classes (most) are not suitable as healers at all. Plenty of others cannot "tank". That doesn't even get into the stuff with traps, disease, etc.

In just about all but the crudest, earliest attempts at tabletop, there is class overlap. There has always been overlap in Darkon (Fighter, Ranger, Paladin/Cavalier). There is no problem with that.

Please let this sink in: The only problem areas are when one class can take care of ALL of the things another would do, overshadowing them entirely, or does specific things SO powerful and so often that they overshadow by impact.

Options, however, are good. In fact, we really would be hard-pressed to get too many out-of-combat flavor abilities for classes.


Sir Gwydion wrote:There are 4 or more classes listed as optimal for each of these roles. How many classes are there in WoW, anyway? We have 10.


In Darkon, any class can fill the role of someone swinging stick on the front line. Does that mean we should start having Fighters or Rangers do extra damage with their weapons, and have Mages swinging half-White, to force them into more specific roles? That seems dumb, but I guess it would make sense for your needless war on overlap.

I don't see how continuous participation for all classes sends us down a path of homogeneity. I don't see how Mages casting spells all day and a Ranger shooting a bow all day makes us somehow all alike.


Sir Gwydion wrote: If 4 classes could do the same job for all our roles based on their abilities, then we might as well get rid of Warrior Mage, because it adds complexity to the game and fits no EXCLUSIVE role.

I mean, you produced Warrior Mage to fill a gap in our ability sets, right?


I (along with 4 other Nobles) produced Warrior Mage to fill a stylistic gap, and to return a class from the early days of Darkon to the game. It was another option for players, without being in any way overpowering.

It fits an EXCLUSIVE (why emphasize that?) role the same way Druids, Assassins, & Cavaliers do.
Prince Inox Elsonáge Thensiur
Swordslinger of No Quarter!
½ Drow Paladin of BABALON
Warriors Guild, KR, OSW, CCx5
••• With Emptiness, With Instinct, With Impurity, and Will •••
Glory unto the Scarlet Woman, Babalon the Mother of Abominations, that rideth upon the Beast
User avatar
Inox
Treasurer
 
Posts: 556
Joined: 2012-01-09

Re: Garb, Feb 12th

Postby BaiterofBAMC » 2012-02-24

How did this GARB post turn into rules on spells? Start a new topic in the right place.
BaiterofBAMC
Darkonian
 
Posts: 57
Joined: 2012-01-13

PreviousNext

Return to General Forum



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

POWERED_BY
Theme created by StylerBB.net