Was the Gift "school" hard to grasp?

Gilwing

Gilwing

Administrator
Alliance Logistics
Alliance Owner
The Gift "school" has life and death. Why change it to healing and curse to simplify it and then have to add an exception to remove curse (which I thought we were attempting to remove)? I think that it is perfect the way it is, life is the opposite of death and one can't be with out the other...like a yin and yang. Won't this change of "school" and added exception cause confusion instead of making it simple?
 
I think it'll only cause confusion for people who insist on being confused, honestly.

Sure, the philosophical RP behind it is going to change, but is the concept of Life restoring your broken body, and me Cursing you with Death really all that hard to grasp?
 
Draven said:
I think it'll only cause confusion for people who insist on being confused, honestly.
Click to expand...

That's what I would have said about magic being both a damage type and a qualifier, to be honest ;P but that has been simplified out.

I agree with Gilwing that I kinda preferred it the old way, partly because I always considered Gift to be pseudo-spirit targeting effects, as opposed to the other battle magic spells which affect the body.

However, frankly the biggest issue I see with the new Curse school is that, to keep the incants consistent, you have to say either:
"I lay a curse upon you, spell cleanse"
Or
"I curse you with cleanse"

Both of which sound... Not right.
 
kalindra said:
However, frankly the biggest issue I see with the new Curse school is that, to keep the incants consistent, you have to say either:
"I lay a curse upon you, spell cleanse"
Or
"I curse you with cleanse"

Both of which sound... Not right.
Click to expand...

Sounds like something my mom would have said to me as a kid.

But yeah, I totally agree. I absolutely despise those incants. But from a thematic perspective, not a confusion one.
 
What is the exception of Cleanse (Remove Curse)? I'm guessing that it is the fact that it can't "remove" death, but Death is an instant effect and all other curse effects are duration effects. Thus, it sounds not like an exception, just a nuance. Cleanse removes curse effects with a duration. Simple.

-MS
 
Fine, but then the "exception" just moves down one step--
What does Cleanse do? Removes all Curse effects (*with a duration.)
Which Curse effects have a duration? All of them, except Death.

Cleanse was added to make Curse similar to the effect groups with a single remove-all spell, eg Release for bindo, Awaken for commands. Conversely, Healing, Gift and Curse (the Earth-only groups) previously had a single counter for each individual effect. Now, in 2.0 Curse has a single remove-all spell, except that the Death curse can't be cured by it and requires a spell in the Healing effect group. So arguably, Curse is now inconsistent with either removal paradigm.
 
Mythic has submitted a proposal to move Cleanse into the healing group, but whether it will be added to the next round of playtests remains to be seen. If it goes through, this should eliminate the weird exception where Death is the only Curse that requires a Healing spell to cure, but Cleanse will still have to say either "any Curse except Death" or "any Curse with a duration".

Personally, I prefer the second of those wording choices, since it's pretty obvious that Death won't have a duration if it immediately kills you.
 
The reason Cleanse is in the Curse group is for following a pattern:

Release - Group: Binding - Effect: Removes Binding
Antidote - Group: Alteration - Effect: Removes Alteration
Awaken - Group: Command - Effect: Removes Command

Etc.
 
curse having a one to remove all =GREAT
Adding death to Curse and Life to Healing with the caveat that Life still only effects some one who is dead ≠ Great
 
Draven said:
I think it'll only cause confusion for people who insist on being confused, honestly.

Sure, the philosophical RP behind it is going to change, but is the concept of Life restoring your broken body, and me Cursing you with Death really all that hard to grasp?
Click to expand...

With the reasons for the new rules to be easier to grasp, no it is harder to grasp. It creates another exception to the list of exceptions that they are tying to remove.
Also i think you had some poor choice of words as life doesn't restore a broken body. Just a dead one, that's it. In fact its the death that removes all the effects, I guess its the corrupt spell that restores the body ;)
 
One of the goals of the new rules was to remove unnecessary clutter from the system, and the large number of effect groups was a prime candidate for that change. The gift group wasn't difficult, but it did exist to contain only one spell.
 
ASFDan said:
One of the goals of the new rules was to remove unnecessary clutter from the system, and the large number of effect groups was a prime candidate for that change. The gift group wasn't difficult, but it did exist to contain only one spell.
Click to expand...

And another was to remove exceptions, when it created another one. Seems counter productive.
 
No matter what, we will always have exceptions. There is no way to write a system without any. We want to limit or remove them. A single spell in a single school was one way to reduce the clutter. :-)
 
Is there a possibility that the condition of being "dead" might be muddying the waters of this discussion in regards to the Death Effect? Once Death is applied, the target is "dead", and there is no ongoing effect to remove. Cleanse states that it removes Curse effects currently active on the target. The spell, from what it appears, does not seem to need any exceptions written into it, because Death does not apply an ongoing Death Effect for Cleanses to remove, it simply makes you "dead". Life addresses the condition of being "dead", it does not remove an ongoing Death Effect (because there is none). So Life is not the removal tool for Death, it is a correction for being "dead".

Does this help at all? I appreciate your feedback!
 
Death is self-deleting! It cleans up after itself!

By leaving a husk.

But whatever. ;)
 
I'm now noticing another weird thing with Gift effects being gone. In the current rules, if you're greater undead it Reverse Life Forced, you generally take reversed Healing/Necro but are immune to Gift. So in 2.0, would you be reverse Healing/Necro other than Life and Corrupt, or should you be Lifed by Corrupt, and would you take the Death curse or be immune? And if you get any of the other curses on you, would there be a Necro version of cleanse* or do you get stuck needing a Dispel/Drain?

A lot of language would have to be overhauled in the rules and in the rituals as well as monster cards. The more I think about it, death-as-curse feels like it creates more inconsistences than it solves.

*If cleanse were added to Healing
 
You forgot to add, what if you are bottled as well?
 
mythic said:
No matter what, we will always have exceptions. There is no way to write a system without any. We want to limit or remove them. A single spell in a single school was one way to reduce the clutter. :)
Click to expand...

With all due respect, what was the clutter? The virtual schools/groups? There isn't any tangible things. Its not like my living room with all my kids toys and stuffed animals all over the place. Now thats clutter.
 
Gilwing said:
With all due respect, what was the clutter? The virtual schools/groups? There isn't any tangible things. Its not like my living room with all my kids toys and stuffed animals all over the place. Now thats clutter.
Click to expand...
Remember how at that October event we saw the guy get hit with a drain, refit his armor, and rejoin the fight? I'm guessing that they started with a performance problem related to players not taking their effects. Then they figured fewer effect groups would help players use the rules correctly during combat. Personally, I always thought death was pretty easy. I thought the confusing stuff was vertigo, feeblemind, etc. Can you run, can you walk, can you talk, can you activate?
 
The number of effect groups was judged to be higher than we wanted, and Gift was a prime target for pruning because it contained a single spell. If you have suggestions for how to improve the implementation that is always helpful, but putting Gift back in is pretty unlikely at this juncture.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top