v0.10 First impressions

Gilwing

Baron
Alliance Logistics
For the most part I've refrained from posting about the new rules in the hope that eventually the play tests would reveal needed corrections, and that such corrections would be evident in newer versions as things moved along. That hasn't happened. My concerns have grown. Several folks have already pointed out the same concerns I have in stark detail. I'll try avoid too much redundancy.

In these efforts towards formulating a new rules system it is clear that we have lost our way.

Part of the problem seems to reflect a loss of understanding and/or respect for the evolution of the game's rule system. It took several decades to arrive at the rules we have in play today. Trial and error. Relative to what's being proposed, adjustments to our rules have been gradual, careful, proportional. A lot of ideas look great in the abstract but in practice, when scaled up to actual events, completely fall apart. That is what is happening here.

These proposals are radical, overly ambitious and throw all semblance of game balance out the window.

These are the observations I have to offer.

Class balance will evaporate. Our game's class balance is currently decent. That took a long time to achieve, by the way. Melee classes are clearly and painfully inferior in these new rules.

Character race will no longer primarily be chosen for RP purposes, but for the opportunity to power game. The option to play a race in which a player has little interest, but for whom the racial abilities offer too much will be too tempting for people. I'd rather have a game in which everyone chooses their character's race not because of the opportunity to have 10 dodges, but because they actually like playing that race.

Scaling will be impossible. How does one expect to scale any encounter effectively when you have no idea what your pcs will be swinging for damage (what they are even capable of swinging for that matter) or when you have no idea if folks are over casting (he just used 20 spell shields with a four column? I guess he can do that now)?

These rules, in totality, do nothing to simplify the game or make it more desirable for new players.

For those of you who don't know, when I was an owner, when all this started, that was the original purpose given to the ARC. Given the original mission that was sanctioned by the owners, I cannot comprehend how we arrived here. The only truly good thing I've seen in this proposal is limiting magic item rituals.

Mike, if you have any interest in keeping this game from receiving a critical blow, from which it might never recover, I implore you to apply the brakes, direct your crew to start over with the original intent of the rules change in mind.

I'm not writing all this to be mean or out of self interest, but because I really appreciate this game and many of the people I know who still enjoy playing it. Having been involved in this game for I don't know, like 18 years, and having been a staff member and owner, I know what this involves, the hours and brainpower it takes to work on rules changes. I respect what the ARC and owners are trying to do, but I also know how easy it is to get carried away. For those of you involved in this, if you have known me and respected my insights, please trust my insight now. As a group, you have overshot and lost your way.

Start over and narrow your goals.
People please don't ignore this post. This is something we should be showing ALL owners.

I'm with ya Gary!
 

Gilwing

Baron
Alliance Logistics
Unfortunately, I think you dramatically underestimate how big of a player backlash that would create from the general playerbase. This idea was floated and dropped due to the fact that there are many, many characters who feel they have built their character around having specific Magic Items (whether Permanent items passed down from prior players, or Team items that they know they can rely upon having available, or whatever). Changing Magic Items around without a Spirit Forge would produce an immense playerbase problem immediately in many, many chapters.
I have to say it, so what? People are going to be upset that the toys are being taken away, but again, so what? Rip off the band-aidtm. We cannot hold back an entire game because some people think they need a forge for items being removed. If the items were stolen would they need a forge too? Cmon. This is a paper thin excuse, I'm sorry. This one change will drastically change the game for the better.
 

Draven

Count
Seattle Staff
Marshal
I have to say it, so what? People are going to be upset that the toys are being taken away, but again, so what? Rip off the band-aidtm. We cannot hold back an entire game because some people think they need a forge for items being removed. If the items were stolen would they need a forge too? Cmon. This is a paper thin excuse, I'm sorry. This one change will drastically change the game for the better.
Eh.

We’re talking a pretty monumental change. I can understand why there’d be relucatance to making that modification without Forges.

I’m in agreement that the change needs to be made, but I also agree that Forges would make the bitter pill hard to swallow.

As for “So what?”

Dude, people have just as much right to enjoy the game as you.
 

Gilwing

Baron
Alliance Logistics
...Firstly, I would like to point out that Mike's comment about a committee of people to put together 2.0 is exactly what we already have -- ARC.
I think you missed when Mike V. said, "people I chose". Mike doesn't choose who's in ARC

I always felt that ARC should be like the Supreme Court. They don't make the laws, they just interpret them.
 

Durnic

Squire
Owner
Oregon Staff
Marshal
I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree then.
 

Octal

Newbie
So much talk of fighters not having a way to defend against all the takeouts.
Followed by ways to increases the defenses they have.

Instead of treating the symptom why not treat the cause?

If the game was not full of takeout spells in the first place, this would not be a problem.
 

Graham Wolsey

Scholar
Denver Staff
Marshal
If the game was not full of takeout spells in the first place, this would not be a problem.
Quoted for truth, back when this rules edition was full of light and hope rather than darkness and despair this was our suggestion. I can't like your post hard enough.

I'm also not suggesting this is just a nerf for casters either. Eviscerate as well. I'd personally like to see Rogues keep Terminate to differentiate them from Fighters and since it has a back requirement.
 

Saephis

Squire
I'm also not suggesting this is just a nerf for casters either. Eviscerate as well. I'd personally like to see Rogues keep Terminate to differentiate them from Fighters and since it has a back requirement.
Or eliminate it, and double assassinate damage. To, say, keep rogue damage consistent.
 

Muir

Fighter
So much talk of fighters not having a way to defend against all the takeouts.
Followed by ways to increases the defenses they have.

Instead of treating the symptom why not treat the cause?

If the game was not full of takeout spells in the first place, this would not be a problem.
I think this is very true, but I also think it's not something we can change without fundamentally changing the nature of the game at this point. Same as my long-held desire to go from day-long logistics periods for skill refresh to mod-long logistics so that people get more chances to do stuff and spend less time dodging gameplay to be fresh for the big bad Saturday Night Fight.
 

Melimir

Newbie
Asheville Staff
I think this is very true, but I also think it's not something we can change without fundamentally changing the nature of the game at this point. Same as my long-held desire to go from day-long logistics periods for skill refresh to mod-long logistics so that people get more chances to do stuff and spend less time dodging gameplay to be fresh for the big bad Saturday Night Fight.
That sounds like a great way to get a buff to monster resists, I don't want to have to go through my entire column to get a confine to stick. I'd rather throw 4 a day and 2 are taken.
 

Muir

Fighter
That sounds like a great way to get a buff to monster resists, I don't want to have to go through my entire column to get a confine to stick. I'd rather throw 4 a day and 2 are taken.
I'm sure you would. Conversely, I'm also sure that the level 1-15 casters would like to have more than one mod in the tank.

The noted change would, as I said, be a huge restructuring that would require fundamental changes to how our spell system works to go from stockpiling uses per day to having a good number of uses that refresh more often.
 

MaxIrons

Squire
Oregon Staff
Marshal
@Muir I do know one way to reduce the number of takeout spells, differentiate them by caster school. For example, if C.Casters got Command, while E. Casters got Curse and Binding means you're reducing the overall number of takeouts by a good chunk. It also seems to work thematically for me at least, C. Casters are brute force and the mind. E. Casters are the body and spirit. It would require a bit of reshuffling at certain levels but a quick initial list would be

Celestial
1: Evocation Bolt 5, Disarm, Fortress, Light, Lesser Investment
2: Evocation Bolt 10, Weapon Shield, Mend Armor, Slow
3: Evocation Bolt 15, Shatter, Wall of Force, Solidify
4: Evocation Bolt 20, Awaken, Banish, Enhanced Blade, Shun
5: Evocation Bolt 25, Spell Shield, Subjugate, Lesser Magic Storm
6: Evocatoin Bolt 30, Elemental Shield, Sleep, Wizard Lock
7: Evocatoin Bolt 35, Charm, Stun Limb
8: Evocation Bolt 40, Dispel, Reflect Spell, (Stun Limb removed)
9: Evocation Bolt 45, Circle of Power, Magic Storm, Prison, Ward

Earth
1: C/C Wounds 5, Disarm, Endow, Turn Undead/Control Undead
2: C/C Wounds 10, Weapon Shield, Repel, Slow
3: C/C Wounds 15, Bind, Sanctuary/Desecrate, Shatter, Weakness
4: C/C Wounds 20, Cleanse, Cure Disease / Disease, Poison Shield
5: C/C Wounds 25, Release, Silence, Spell Shield, Lesser Earth Storm / Lesser Chaos Storm
6: C/C Wounds 30, Earth Blade/Chaos Blade, Elemental Shield, Wither/Restore
7: C/C Wounds 35, Confine, Destory Undead/Create Undead, Destruction
8: C/C Wounds 40, Purify/Drain, Reflect Spell, Paralysis
9: C/C Wounds 45, Circle of Power, Earth Storm/Chaos Storm, Life/Corrupt, Death

Spells removed (for ease of reference)
Celestial
2: Repel
3: Bind
5: Release
7: Confine

Earth
4: Awaken, Shun
6: Sleep
7: Charm

It's a rough first draft of an easy-ish way to reduce the number of take you out of the fight effects.
 

DiscOH

Artisan
Binding is about the only takeout worth memorizing consistently (because mobs have partial immunity instead of total)

Giving unique access to binding and healing is pretty silly.
 

MondayMcGee

Scholar
San Francisco Staff
Giving unique access to binding and healing is pretty silly.
Why? Earth having unique access to healing, and Celestial having unique access to non-necro damage spells, is a well established paradigm. I think further differentiating the two schools of magic is totally appropriate.
 

DiscOH

Artisan
Because the first worthwhile spell on the C list (other than disarm, assuming targets aren't all claws) wouldn't show up until level 4 and because command does just about nothing to a huge percentage of monsters.

1 packet of relevant CC is better than 1 packet of damage, regardless of defenses called. Evocation would need to be a ton better if this was the type of change made.

People need to keep in mind that wands aren't even relevant until like level 15, and they don't get good until around 30. If you make Celestialists terrible early game and godly end game, you just end up with a lot of spirit forges.
 

Muir

Fighter
I'm not against this, but with earth getting 2x the takeouts I wouldn't think they'd need a wand equivalent as well.
Having the option for more variety of takeouts does nothing to avoid the design paradigm of 'earth casters are solely healers', unfortunately. They have takeout options already, and are discouraged from memorizing them.
 

MaxIrons

Squire
Oregon Staff
Marshal
So, my list there is a proof of concept.

Octal stated that the problem is CC is currently too strong, Muir stated we couldn't reduce the effectiveness of CC and stay similar enough to the Alliance system. I provided a way to reduce the effectiveness of CC, by reducing the number of CC effects on the field.

To go through the list and modify the effects themselves to debuff instead of take-out effects:

Bind: Change to overwriting itself. If legs are bound, binding arms frees legs and vice versa.
Sleep: First hard CC. Change to where taking body damage ends the effect. If you get picked off out of position it sucks, but among friends they can wake you up... but usually without your armor and you're a little hurt.
Confine: Require caster to continue to point at target, same as repel. Teamwork solves the CC and it costs the caster to use.
Prison: Cannot killing blow through Prison, target can go to bleeding out to end the effect in addition to caster choosing to drop it.

Just rough ideas off the top of my head to modify the effects, while still being Alliance.
 
Last edited:

Melimir

Newbie
Asheville Staff
I'm sure you would. Conversely, I'm also sure that the level 1-15 casters would like to have more than one mod in the tank.
As a low level scholar with currently only 1 9th slot (column builder and no formal magic) I would significantly prefer the current one or two spells get resisted and then I land my bind, and have another 3-5 takedowns for the day, versus all of my spells being resisted in most encounters. Calling out the spells isn't the fun part. Having it actually land is.
 

Muir

Fighter
As a low level scholar with currently only 1 9th slot (column builder and no formal magic) I would significantly prefer the current one or two spells get resisted and then I land my bind, and have another 3-5 takedowns for the day, versus all of my spells being resisted in most encounters. Calling out the spells isn't the fun part. Having it actually land is.
This is a scaling problem. Talk to your plot team about this, and suggest they consider more pops as opposed to more resists.
 
Top