70 posts
|
Post by equivocation on Aug 22, 2015 18:57:44 GMT -8
If you look at previous builds of the stuff, you'll see that earlier there was the problem that mages only had utility spells and broken combos like chain-freezing someone or junk like Channel Fireball (or, heaven forbid, the old version of Lookie Here that basically made it impossible to fight the mage unless you passed a Resolve vs. Magic check to penetrate their illusion). Their combat powers have been rebalanced to be a little closer to someone rolling out with sword-and-board but the simple fact is they are designed to stand up to "optimized" fighters with Heavy armor.
However, the fact you've noticed is that any dips into magic are really, really, really useful. At low ranks, you can pick up no-save things like Invisibility, Flight, Eyes of Truth, Heal Wounds, Eyes of the Hunter or other buffs, and Wards. At high ranks, you can pick up those and things that do have saves like mind-affecting spells, combat spells, utility Bolts, etc.
However, keep in mind that Heavy Armor on a mage doesn't only reduce mana pool - it reduces rolls, making them essentially roll as though it were a low-magic-dip trait instead of a heavy investment, leaving them no better off than someone who had 3 magic and RPed learning a lot of spells.
Interestingly, I believe that currently the most effective build for nonmagical fighters right now is using Huntsman, NOT Fighting, throwing Large weapons that are boosted up to Massive by Esoteric Arrow or the new ranged Fighting Style (with an added dose of poison on each from the start if you want to be really mean).
|
|
|
|
Post by Shayariel on Aug 23, 2015 5:34:34 GMT -8
If you look at previous builds of the stuff, you'll see that earlier there was the problem that mages only had utility spells and broken combos like chain-freezing someone or junk like Channel Fireball (or, heaven forbid, the old version of Lookie Here that basically made it impossible to fight the mage unless you passed a Resolve vs. Magic check to penetrate their illusion). Their combat powers have been rebalanced to be a little closer to someone rolling out with sword-and-board but the simple fact is they are designed to stand up to "optimized" fighters with Heavy armor. However, the fact you've noticed is that any dips into magic are really, really, really useful. At low ranks, you can pick up no-save things like Invisibility, Flight, Eyes of Truth, Heal Wounds, Eyes of the Hunter or other buffs, and Wards. At high ranks, you can pick up those and things that do have saves like mind-affecting spells, combat spells, utility Bolts, etc. However, keep in mind that Heavy Armor on a mage doesn't only reduce mana pool - it reduces rolls, making them essentially roll as though it were a low-magic-dip trait instead of a heavy investment, leaving them no better off than someone who had 3 magic and RPed learning a lot of spells. Interestingly, I believe that currently the most effective build for nonmagical fighters right now is using Huntsman, NOT Fighting, throwing Large weapons that are boosted up to Massive by Esoteric Arrow or the new ranged Fighting Style (with an added dose of poison on each from the start if you want to be really mean). Certainly I believe it had been an evolution by now, yet I personally think that the gaining of spells (initially as by progression) for non-magic options versus magic options is currently not evened out. Racial traits or faction memberships for now left aside, I will put this as example to clarify what I mean: Char 1: Fighting 5, Strength 5, Reflexes 5, Huntsman 5, Resolve 5, Social Standing 5 Char 2: Fighting 5, Magic 5, Reflexes 5, Huntsman 5, Resolve 5, Social Standing 5 With these chars you will get already different skills. Char 1 can only take "The Fox" as all other has higher prerequisites, no fighting skill, no special attack, no special tactic. Char 2 though, exchanging strength for magic, while getting also only "The Fox", gets 10 spells with 5 mana by that. He has, the same HP, the same melee or archery fighting skill, and can opt to appear like the pure fighter on wish, is not forced, but can. And up to Heavy Armor they have still the advantage of being able to cast something at least. If taking Corpse Magic, they can alter Huntsman, Reflexes or armor, and by that gain a definite advantage over the pure fighter. The pure fighter can only counter that magic if they use full plate, an option open to the magic user as well. The pure fighter does not have an "option", they are just that one way. Now with character development, the mage invests X weeks of RP to learn a new spell, or months for new traits, and then weeks for new skills. The fighter has less options again, can only do the "months for traits, weeks for skills" way. And their skills, the fighting trait based skills, are even limited to max out at 2 combined ones, while a magic user can compile the most practical set from all spell categories (Corpus, Necromancy, etc.). If you now mention Esoteric Arrow, a spell school, you in fact mention another advantage of magic-users vs. non-magic users as there are no comparable schools for archers or melee who offer you specialized maneuvers that are not based on magic. So summing it all up, we find even 3 advantages of magic users compared to non-magic users currently: - Two spells per invested point in magic vs. 0 special maneuver per invested point in fighting or huntsman
- More and faster benefits from character advancement vs. even combination limited fighting advancement
- Several benefit giving Spell Schools vs no pure melee/archery school
and well, 4. would be, maybe though not fully applicable, that when you start fresh, you need 8 points in fighting to get even only 1 skill (likely must have another trait on certain value too), while with spells you dump 1-9 points as you like and are able to use your magic "specials" already. And all that with the soul countering advantage of the skill "Armor Mastery" (if you do not wish other 2 fighting skills, can only have 2), and less disadvantages from armor unless the mage opts to fight more (but not only) mundane. Means all pure fighters should be "knights" in full plate and with Armor Mastery. while mages can opt to be that or have else also a really broad variance of options with spell schools, spell categories, melee/archery/armor, etc. ...
If thinking further into that direction - one trait that gives additional options/maneuvers against near no costs - one would need maneuvers for every trait in the quantity of spell categories, and schools for every way a char specializes, e.g. fighting schools, social standing schools, shadow schools, etc.
All that was basically the reason for the subjected question: "Is magic mandatory" - which could be, but as was written officially earlier in the thread, changes are coming. Until then it was also suggested to me to wait with a char reroll.
|
|
3,197 posts
|
Post by Lιттle Ƭree (Cedar Ashland) on Aug 23, 2015 8:50:24 GMT -8
Have you seen our character progression page on the website? It allows characters, magical or martial, to improve upon their character they created. So you would be able to increase trait rank and work on gaining other skills through RP.  I would also point out most spells we offer are not advantageous within a combat scenario. Aside from a few spells that can summon an NPC or the evocation spells, if a mage uses the others they are at a high disadvantage in combat, generally speaking. We've run the scenarios with various character builds - and watched others play out in combat scenes on sim - and there's a good balance between the martial and the magical types, with the martial nearly always coming out on top - more even however if it's a combat mage they fight against, specifically a battlemage. |
|
|
|
Post by Shayariel on Aug 23, 2015 10:18:01 GMT -8
Have you seen our character progression page on the website? It allows characters, magical or martial, to improve upon their character they created. So you would be able to increase trait rank and work on gaining other skills through RP. I would also point out most spells we offer are not advantageous within a combat scenario. Aside from a few spells that can summon an NPC or the evocation spells, if a mage uses the others they are at a high disadvantage in combat, generally speaking. We've run the scenarios with various character builds - and watched others play out in combat scenes on sim - and there's a good balance between the martial and the magical types, with the martial nearly always coming out on top - more even however if it's a combat mage they fight against, specifically a battlemage. I have seen that page yes, and am actually already working on one progression. With the second I wait for the revamp as I was suggested to do. But frankly, while yes, many spells seem to be roleplay enhancers, and while yes, further progression into one direction may change odds, I have had now two battles against exactly a battle mage. The first became a draw - because I had the dice luck of rolling near any attack critical, and the enemy near every defense critical fail. The second battle, no chance. You can check the roleplays in my diary logs. In the first battle the other pumped up their minion with just channeling then shielded himself, often in a way my char had no possible way of seeing magic being used. In the second fight he enhanced like two combat skills or one twice, and became by that a better fighter than myself - and in both battles the buffed up minion was a reserve, in first battle used, in second battle not. The Corpse and Nature spells make a big difference, I would guess that the Evocation ones are likely fair even if only used in battle given which damage mundane weapons do. But also, as a spell usually lasts for "a scene", the caster can well buff himself on a sidenote during the pre-battle/conflict roleplay emotes, in a way no one notices he is casting at all, and when then the battle erupts they are as or even far stronger than any pure melee - especially as they can opt to fight with the same weapons, the same style as pure melee, e.g. long weapons, do the same damage, etc. They can even opt to wear the same armor (my enemy had heavy) and still be able to self-buff, just not as much. Now if you go to "level 10" and have a fighter who only went Fighting/Strength/Reflexes, and a magician (enchanter, non-cambative magic user) who only went Magic/Knowledge, a fighter with full plate and two handed weapon, and a mage with silk robe and only a short wand, surely in melee the mage might get the short end of the stick. But if you find a mage that specializes in combat influencing spells they will likely always stand out against normal melees - with above stated advantages, from char creation to char progression. And I am talking about pure non-magic users against others who have at least 1 in Magic, i.e. the chance to use spells at all, and with that spell schools. Not questioning your tests of course, maybe I was just having bad luck or such, but I still wonder... As pure melee one can fight straight with Fighting < 8, no Fighting skill available then, no special attack style, no school based added maneuvers, nothing, just grab that sword and hack away. WITH fighting >= 8 one can choose one out of alltime max of two skills for the beginning, and likely that is not useful: E.g. one can chose usually the fast blade style with which I can roll attack against Reflexes instead of Fighting - to get Fighting over 8, one needs a racial bonus, then one can get Reflexes to max 6, which means with the skill you can attack at 7 instead of 8. Shield Mastery has a high requirement, Armor Mastery would help, but is not outright inline with all fighter chars (e.g. mine is a barbarian, i.e. is not a full plate knight), Dual Weapon is hard to reach with traits at the start, and then mostly useless as it can only be used once per scene, Small weapons only applicable for small weapons, Precision Strike is new and rather a Huntsman skill than fighting, and way of norris surely a joke. Still: If I go 1 Magic, I can already with 1 mana and 1 emote, before the battle starts and then for the entire RP duration, raise my Reflexes by +2, with Call to War I can raise my fighting or reflexes even further - imagine a sideclass mage main fighter with corpse magic. Depending on the race such a char is only to be defeated if you have super dice luck. Else depending on the tests, sure, dice can produce everything, yet I would consider a pure melee fighter (or archer) to be a danger if toe-to-toe, a magicial is usually a lethal threat if one has to mash through their partymembers before, or if they go pure battle magic (high damage or utility then, low own HP). |
|
3,197 posts
|
Post by Lιттle Ƭree (Cedar Ashland) on Aug 23, 2015 10:43:22 GMT -8
There should be something, in theory, done that could give away the fact a spell is being cast. We have rules on components used. While it is of course possible for a caster to attempt to be clever so their antics are unrealised, the possibility should still be there. I'm uncertain what you mean by buffing up companions or enhancing skills though. Could you clarify please?  |
|
|
|
Post by Shayariel on Aug 23, 2015 10:51:39 GMT -8
Surely, basically the Corpse magic spells like Cheetah's Grace (+2 ref), Hawk's Cunning (+2 hunt), Armor, Call to War (+1 Fighting and either Strength, Reflexes, or Resolve) as well as Naturalism magic spells like Animal Companion and Animal Growth. The selfbuffs were partly even applied twice, e.g. the fighting buff, all in the roleplay that happened before the battle started - you can see that all in my char diary, I have added the roleplay logs.
|
|
3,197 posts
|
Post by Lιттle Ƭree (Cedar Ashland) on Aug 23, 2015 12:21:32 GMT -8
Thanks for IMing me in world to talk about this more. I'll look over everything you've sent my way and have brought some of it to the other admin. ^^ |
|
70 posts
|
Post by equivocation on Aug 23, 2015 16:50:43 GMT -8
If you now mention Esoteric Arrow, a spell school, you in fact mention another advantage of magic-users vs. non-magic users as there are no comparable schools for archers or melee who offer you specialized maneuvers that are not based on magic. So summing it all up, we find even 3 advantages of magic users compared to non-magic users currently: - Two spells per invested point in magic vs. 0 special maneuver per invested point in fighting or huntsman
- More and faster benefits from character advancement vs. even combination limited fighting advancement
- Several benefit giving Spell Schools vs no pure melee/archery school
Keep in mind - at the time I posted that, the best way to get Esoteric Arrow (as it had no Magic Requirement) was to have exactly 1 or 2 magic just to get the spell school. What I was explaining is much like what Cedar said - that Magic does not provide a massive pile of strong main options but it provides absurd amounts of utility to any character at any rank. Even 2 points is more than enough to provide a huge benefit at negligible cost in the form of no-school use of potions or spells, not for in-combat effects, but as I said, for picking up no-save effects. Having up to 4 effects that don't involve rolls is a ridiculously useful. So even with the changes rolled out last night, the answer remains: Is it mandatory? No. Is it disproportionately useful for noncombat applications? Yes. The thing you've no doubt noticed is that the system as it is is not designed to support low-armor fighters. The Barbarian is not an archetype that 'exists' right now in it - there are no skills to support it, no mechanics to bring it up to speed with other combinations of stats and equipment. The Barbarian, in short, gets fucked for RPing a low-armor fighter, nearly always, because the system is built around the assumption that a fighter will always stack as much armor as they can wear without penalty and there's no benefit to choosing another method of fighting. |
|
40 posts
|
Post by Eden on Aug 23, 2015 18:46:29 GMT -8
Roleplay is the real goal, but reading these posts and my own personal thoughts make it seem like portraying a certain role is difficult when you are unable to support that role in some practical instances. A battlemage will deal more damage per spell cast than a pure caster due to the battlemage gaining +1 size damage bonus to evocation. Imagining yourself as the wizard with these amazing explosive spells kinda gets trumped by the chainmail covered, sword toting battle mage throwing fireballs that do 50% more damage on average. These advantages on paper look so strong, though in actual testing the very high number of critical hits from a very wide range of possible rolls turns almost any battle into a coin flip despite ranks. A low trait with a fair or good roll will not only beat but critical hit against an unlucky high ranked roll. Low health, high damage makes for fights that are often 1-3 hits to complete so a tiny bit of bad luck or a little good luck is an instant deal breaker. The current Dice have a progressive diminishing return in taking the higher values, so much so that just having JUST enough for that special trick or skill is the focus since the numbers really do not offer enough of a solid difference. In testing rank 3 rolls versus rank 7 rolls the results are still about 50/50 for either side to win a contest even though rank 7 invested more than double the points. Draw the rolls out more and more, into the beyond tens of rolls and it starts to slightly favor the higher rank, though contests last only a few rolls on average making them often just short contests of luck. In conclusion it just seems taking a rank for a specific skill/spell/ability combination is "best" while ignoring the perceived value of each trait itself. Magic alone feels weak against Melee, but hybrid combinations seem to greatly exploit the best of both with the least of drawbacks. |
|
70 posts
|
Post by equivocation on Aug 23, 2015 19:25:55 GMT -8
Eden, you're quite right. In fact, I had done the math and generated these results as far the absolutely wretched diminishing returns and poor return on trait points:
Rounded off, traits of 0 to 10 against a trait of 0:
50%, 54.5%, 58.3%, 61.5%, 64.3%, 66.7%, 68.8%, 70.6%, 72.2%, 73.7%, 75%
That makes for a progression of
+4.5%, +3.8%, +3.2%, +2.8%, +2.4%, +2.1%, +1.8%, +1.6%, +1.5%, +1.3%... rounded off.
There are two possible systems in the works. One, I developed and ran by Cail and we decided it generated roughly the numbers we had found more preferable, but there may be another system being used instead depending on some things Aly is checking into. I'll keep things discreet until those go live, though.
The short explanation, though, is that I've brought up those issues already and the staff is working on different possible solutions. <3
It's always good to see someone else validating my claims, though!
|
|
|
|
Post by Shayariel on Aug 24, 2015 0:10:11 GMT -8
Keep in mind - at the time I posted that, the best way to get Esoteric Arrow (as it had no Magic Requirement) was to have exactly 1 or 2 magic just to get the spell school. What I was explaining is much like what Cedar said - that Magic does not provide a massive pile of strong main options but it provides absurd amounts of utility to any character at any rank. Even 2 points is more than enough to provide a huge benefit at negligible cost in the form of no-school use of potions or spells, not for in-combat effects, but as I said, for picking up no-save effects. Having up to 4 effects that don't involve rolls is a ridiculously useful. So even with the changes rolled out last night, the answer remains: Is it mandatory? No. Is it disproportionately useful for noncombat applications? Yes. The thing you've no doubt noticed is that the system as it is is not designed to support low-armor fighters. The Barbarian is not an archetype that 'exists' right now in it - there are no skills to support it, no mechanics to bring it up to speed with other combinations of stats and equipment. The Barbarian, in short, gets fucked for RPing a low-armor fighter, nearly always, because the system is built around the assumption that a fighter will always stack as much armor as they can wear without penalty and there's no benefit to choosing another method of fighting. That's how I understood magic schools - that, having a magic trait value as requirement or not, you would have to be magically enabled in some way or the other. And yes, I did not really mean the possible power of a fireball or such, I do not even know that, have never experienced it. But what I meant always was the disparity in options, and the costs of progression for non-magic vs. magic using characters. Again: - If I invest 1 single point into Magic I automatically get the option to choose from 2 spells, which can be self-buffs, summonings, damage or whatever. If I invest 1 single point into Fighting or Reflexes or Social Status, I get exactly... nothing comparable. For this I leave the overall common to all ranked +X dice modifiers aside.
- A magic user has the option to fight fully like the melee, with the same armor, raising the same traits, the same weapons - at the temporary expense of some or all his fighting skills. The fighter does not have this option to go magic when desired.
- A magic user has the option to buff themselves up, which means, with e.g. magic 4+, 4 certain spells chosen, they can buff themselves up to +6 points and +2 HP: E.g. Cheetah's Grace (+2 Reflexes), Hawk's Cunning (+2 Huntsman), Armor (+1 to +3 HP), Call to War (+1 to Fighting AND either Strength, Reflexes, or Resolve). There is no roll to prevent that benefit, there is no other timer than "the entire scene", and it might even be that one can cast such a spell twice.
In regards to armor, I personally have no issue with that. Although it might be cool, if a low armor fighter would be e.g. faster than a armored fighter, it is my choice to use that heavy armor (and I have nice looking barbarian heavy armor outfits that could also be claimed as being fullplate) or not. Just to bring this into context of the thread, I do have the option to use that armor or not. I do NOT have the option to go magic unless I reroll my character into a magic user, I do NOT get maneuver options to choose from when investing 1 point into Fighting or Reflex or Huntsmans, etc.. I do NOT get maneuvers for only investing in a certain trait, but need to plan precisely how to distribute my points over various traits so that I get a skill that might give me a maneuver (incl. the two new Fighting skills, one of which seems to be sorted into the wrong category as it is Huntsman depending, and the other rather a joke skill, Way of (Chuck) Norris).
I am not here to win every battle, I have played like all from slave, over barmaid, savage, to vile necromancer or ferocious cleric dragon in SL Fantasy RP. So I have no issue to remain either support in the battles between the strong (magic users) or even become slave to someone, I can play out all of that and still maintain my fun and likely provide fun for others too. I just wanted to clarify, and I think that has been done in this thread, if magic is mandatory if you want to have a possible protagonist character, or if there is indeed an issue. The issue has been confirmed, it is being worked on. I do sincerely hope that a solution comes that will not negatively impact the sim population, and/or end in a "nerf" of the casters who made their characters far before my arrival.
In the end, Eden put it best: Roleplay is the real goal While yes, dice rolls can always be good or bad, e.g. in my first fight in IoV I had a enormous high number of crit attack successes and the enemy an enormous high number of crit defense fails - in the end it became a draw or loss for me (my char says win IC), because I had not used the option of wearing heavy or fullplate amor, the enemies horse sized dire wolf pet just mangled me in the end, coming in as priorly left aside backup. And I just know that where there is a number-cruncher system, people begin to MMORPG optimize, I am likely no exception as I, yes, also love to see my little girl shine now and then. Where such a system is not installed, people begin to else powergame if they cannot lose or else accept any negative impact on their own character (and if that is only to be stimulated to say something uncool/foul-mouthed >>> IC <<<). That is SL RP, always been, always gonna be. For my beginning here I chose this Conan inspired yet far more dumb, savage barbarian grunt fighter who has no clue about magic or even speaking a grammatically correct sentence. If it would be the result of the thread, reply to my question that such is not a technically good choice, it takes 3 mouse clicks and one of my old Necromancer outfits are equipped, 3 more for a skeleton minion char avatar plus teleport, leaving only the paperwork of rerolling the old / applying with the added char. So far the feedback about my char I got in IM from players was really complimentary and flattery, heart raising for sure. And also, as I have a lot of experiences in setting up gaming systems and rules in SL, throughout my RP career, I even might be able to give some "food for thoughts" to the admins who work so hard to provide us all the best system possible given the pretty common aspects of SL players' playstyles, and with Little Tree I already did that - I forwarded her, as possible source for ideas, the files of our last RP sim's spell lists (based on D&D, chosen by SL playability and scaled/balanced for our system), and the archer and melee maneuvers (with e.g. aimed shot/strike, offensive/defensive stances, different arrow tip types, feints and flurries, etc.). |
|
|
|
Post by Shayariel on Aug 24, 2015 0:21:32 GMT -8
Small addition: I just found what I had been experiencing in my first battles:
|
|
3,197 posts
|
Post by Lιттle Ƭree (Cedar Ashland) on Aug 24, 2015 6:27:20 GMT -8
We have a bunch of fighting styles were looking to include on the site. And we've been talking about removing restrictions for then for non magical types. No promises though since I can't make those. But know that we have our fighters in mind and while it might be a struggle Wed like to make fighters have as much opportunity as mages. You also have to fight the one class of mage that was buffed specifically to hold their own in a fight lol. And well I have you my thoughts already on those logs. Thanks again for the ideas you sent my way. I have been going through them all. |
|
|
|
Post by Tief on Aug 25, 2015 18:02:06 GMT -8
--
|
|
3,197 posts
|
Post by Lιттle Ƭree (Cedar Ashland) on Aug 25, 2015 19:45:16 GMT -8
Except it takes more time to complete any of those spells than it does to hit someone with the sword. Also, if invisible you can't be hostile so that doesn't help. And so on.
|
|
