Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [Everway-L] Magic - once again

Expand Messages
  • Joshua Kronengold
    ... This is a very intersting example. Clearly, based on intent, a character with an Earth score of 7 should not be killable outright, or even woundable in a
    Message 1 of 20 , Feb 2, 2005
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      kat writes:
      >Also I'd argue that someone with an earth score of 7 is not meant to be
      >hurt by a fireball from a 5pt mage.

      This is a very intersting example.

      Clearly, based on intent, a character with an Earth score of 7 should
      not be killable outright, or even woundable in a single attack by a 5
      point mage.

      On the other hand, the 5 point mage has actually invested 10 points in
      their magic, leaving only 10 points to spend on the other three
      elements (other than their primary) and powers -- less than the 7
      Earth character has. So they deserve some consideration, and should
      have a significant advantage in a direct conflict, all else being
      equal...they just shouldn't be able to take the "I stomp my opponent
      flat with magic" approach in that situation, but should have to get
      more subtle.

      --
      Joshua Kronengold (mneme@(io.com, labcats.org)) |\ _,,,--,,_ ,)
      --^-- "Get your mind right and you can make a stick /,`.-'`' -, ;-;;'
      /\\ your wand and the sky your hat and a puddle |,4- ) )-,_ ) /\
      /-\\\ your magic..." -- Granny Weatherwax '---''(_/--' (_/-'
    • kat
      Having re-read the original post to this list as well as the responces, I d like to thank Longspeak who has already said most of what I would have to begin
      Message 2 of 20 , Feb 2, 2005
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        Having re-read the original post to this list as well as the responces, I'd
        like to thank Longspeak who has already said most of what I would have to
        begin with.

        A few points worth noting:
        The average magic score is 0 rather than 3
        if we look at the average sphere there should only be one or two mages of
        anykind of talent
        most people don't have Magic. Everyone will Air earth fire and water.

        That a mage of average skills has a 3 in magic is different than average
        people having an average magic score.

        Having someone invest in magic get a two point bump seems to solve one
        problem and create another.

        Lets talk about the killing. It takes a 5 pt mage to kill the average
        person with a single magic spell.

        According to the book, the Average mage can't kill the average man with a
        single spell.

        Lets see what a 3 point mage can do to the average man.

        He could set the average man's clothes on fire. (heck even a level 2 mage
        should be able to do that) While the average man is frantic the mage with
        malicious intent could slowly burn average man alive. 1 Spell sets clothes
        on fire. 1 spell tends the hearth to keep the fire going. Perhaps another
        spell to redirect water or whatever else the targeted man would do to put
        himself out. Perhaps a minor spell of bright flame towards anyone who goes
        to the targets aid.
        The target dies. It just took many rathere than one spell to do it.


        The Average mage also has the advantage of distance on his average target.
        He can hit him with invisable hands from across the room. Being a mage
        even if he only has a 3 in fire he can keep throwing magic punches out of
        the physical range of his target till the target gets knocked out. So it
        may take more time but the average mage can eventually kill the average
        man. Being Powerful rather than Average just means the level 5 mage can do
        it faster.


        Also I'd argue that someone with an earth score of 7 is not meant to be
        hurt by a fireball from a 5pt mage. To have invested 7 points in earth is
        to have someone more than just hardy. Using the 2 element test even with
        an earth and air of 5 you should be able to hurt 7pt Earth guy. He shrugs
        it off the way you might shrugg off the attack of a 10 year old.


        What makes the 2 element test useful is that it gives the player a
        guideline to effect that once they get used to the only limitation is in
        their creativity.
      • longspeak@comcast.net
        ... No, the 5-point mage has invested 5 points in magic. The other five points go to an element, giving him at least a five in the element, a respectable
        Message 3 of 20 , Feb 2, 2005
        View Source
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In Everway-L@yahoogroups.com, Joshua Kronengold <mneme@i...>
          wrote:
          > On the other hand, the 5 point mage has actually invested 10 points
          > in their magic,
          >
          No, the 5-point mage has invested 5 points in magic. The other five
          points go to an element, giving him at least a five in the element, a
          respectable score which has its own uses. They weren't thrown away.

          > So they deserve some consideration,
          >
          Again, they do. That's what the two-element rules is for.

          > and should have a significant advantage in a direct conflict, all
          > else being equal...they just shouldn't be able to take the "I stomp
          > my opponent flat with magic" approach in that situation, but should
          > have to get more subtle.
          >
          Why should a mystic with 20 points automatically have any advantage -
          significant or otherwise - over another 20 point hero? That's like
          saying "I spent three points on my invulnerability power, so I should
          be invulnerable to fatigue, because I couldn't spend those points on
          Earth like I wanted. And I should be able to hit harder with my
          invulnerable fists because I couldn't spend that extra point on Fire."

          Powers & Magic bestow additional abilities in exchange for having
          fewer points to spilt among the elements. The 'strength' of a mage
          then *is* those additional abilities. You have traded away stonger
          elements for additional abilities, and now it's up to you the player
          to make those abilities work for you.

          If you don't want the versatility, buy powers, or spend the points on
          stronger elements. But don't mourn the mage's lack of power, because
          while you are, he will charm your daughter, steal your gold, cripple
          your cattle, dry your crops and turn the neighbors' hearts against
          you.

          A Thousand Times,

          LT
        • Joshua Kronengold
          ... No they weren t. But the five points they spent on magic should have about the same impact that the same five points would have had, had they been spent
          Message 4 of 20 , Feb 2, 2005
          View Source
          • 0 Attachment
            longspeak@... writes:
            >--- In Everway-L@yahoogroups.com, Joshua Kronengold <mneme@i...>
            >wrote:
            >> On the other hand, the 5 point mage has actually invested 10 points
            >> in their magic,
            >No, the 5-point mage has invested 5 points in magic. The other five
            >points go to an element, giving him at least a five in the element, a
            >respectable score which has its own uses. They weren't thrown away.

            No they weren't. But the five points they spent on magic should have
            about the same impact that the same five points would have had, had
            they been spent on boosting the element to 10, ignoring the fact
            that you can't actually -buy- an attribute at level 10.

            Some of this is going to be impact in terms of flexibility and
            versitility, sure...but it's still very important that a level 5 mage
            is more concentrated than anyone with a 9 in any element.

            >> and should have a significant advantage in a direct conflict, all
            >> else being equal...they just shouldn't be able to take the "I stomp
            >> my opponent flat with magic" approach in that situation, but should
            >> have to get more subtle.
            >Why should a mystic with 20 points automatically have any advantage -
            >significant or otherwise - over another 20 point hero?

            Anyone with a higher applicable element should have a huge advantage
            in a direct conlfict with someone with a lower element. That's a lot
            of what the elements mean -- you are buying far greater power in the
            field in question, and are paying for it by taking weaknesses in other
            fields. -Both- of these need to come into play -- a 9/6/3/2 character
            isn't in any balanced if they aren't penalized for having two very
            weak elements. If the 9 and 6 are in fire and earth, they should win
            any direct physical confrontation, but should also run into situations
            where their incompetence at perception, empathy, and communication are
            a major factor.

            By the same token, a character with 5-7 points in magic is hugely
            concentrated in magic, and should get a similarly huge impact out of
            it.

            >That's like
            >saying "I spent three points on my invulnerability power, so I should
            >be invulnerable to fatigue, because I couldn't spend those points on
            >Earth like I wanted. And I should be able to hit harder with my
            >invulnerable fists because I couldn't spend that extra point on Fire."

            Uh...no.
            It's like saying "I spend 3 points on my invulnerability power, so my
            power should have as much impact on the game as just spending the same
            three points on Earth." (which, IMO, means it should be far stronger,
            but not have the wide applications that a high Earth score has; if
            you're charging 3 points for "invulnerable", I assume it's frequent,
            double major, or just triple-major, since it sure isn't versitile).

            >The 'strength' of a mage then *is* those additional abilities.

            And yet...magic costs double.

            Powers generally cost a lot less than an element, but have a much
            higher, more specific impact.
            Elements cost quite a bit, but are very powerful at high levels, and
            moreover, you are (justly) penalized for not having any one of them.
            Magic sits in between -- it's as expensive as an element to get to a
            decent level, and therefore weakens your "true" element total much
            more than powers do, yet it's far too easy to not let it have nearly
            the impact that the same level of an elment will (it's too easy to let
            very expensive powers also fall into this trap as well).

            --
            Joshua Kronengold (mneme@(io.com, labcats.org)) |\ _,,,--,,_ ,)
            --^-- "Get your mind right and you can make a stick /,`.-'`' -, ;-;;'
            /\\ your wand and the sky your hat and a puddle |,4- ) )-,_ ) /\
            /-\\\ your magic..." -- Granny Weatherwax '---''(_/--' (_/-'
          • Steve A. Jarjoura
            ... on ... because ... cripple ... Apparently you hang out with a much rougher crowd of mages then I do! Charm your daughter indeed, I never! ~runester~
            Message 5 of 20 , Feb 2, 2005
            View Source
            • 0 Attachment
              --- In Everway-L@yahoogroups.com, longspeak@c... wrote:
              > If you don't want the versatility, buy powers, or spend the points
              on
              > stronger elements. But don't mourn the mage's lack of power,
              because
              > while you are, he will charm your daughter, steal your gold,
              cripple
              > your cattle, dry your crops and turn the neighbors' hearts against
              > you.
              >


              Apparently you hang out with a much rougher crowd of mages then I
              do! "Charm your daughter" indeed, I never!

              ~runester~
            • longspeak@comcast.net
              ... I think our disagreement at its most fundamental level one of breadth versus depth. You seem to be arguing that points sacrificed to Magic should
              Message 6 of 20 , Feb 2, 2005
              View Source
              • 0 Attachment
                --- In Everway-L@yahoogroups.com, Joshua Kronengold <mneme@i...>
                wrote:
                > But the five points they spent on magic should have about the same
                > impact that the same five points would have had, had they been
                > spent on boosting the element to 10, ignoring the fact that you
                > can't actually -buy- an attribute at level 10. Some of this is
                > going to be impact in terms of flexibility and versitility,
                > sure...but it's still very important that a level 5 mage is more
                > concentrated than anyone with a 9 in any element.
                >
                I think our disagreement at its most fundamental level one of breadth
                versus depth. You seem to be arguing that points "sacrificed" to
                Magic should purchase a depth of ability equal to those same points
                being spent on an element. Magic as written goes the other way.
                Magic is all about breadth of ability.

                When you spend points on Magic, you are buying more than just the
                abilities you could have had if you had spent those points on raising
                an element. You are buying a broad range of abilities.

                When you spend points on a single element, you are investing in a
                depth of ability. While each element still covers a relatively wide
                variety of attributes, none possesses the same breadth of ability as
                Magic, so your Fire-9 hero is pretty darned focused

                How do I know this? Because in the rules as written, the two-element
                test lets you compare your Magic of (we'll stick with) 5, to ANY two
                elements, also at 5. With a single word, my Gandalf-wannabe from the
                previous example, can hold off a warrior with Fire-5 and Earth-5. He
                can also grow crops like a Farmer with Earth-5 and Air-5, detect and
                counter a mystical influnce as a Hero with Water-5 and Earth-5 and
                make someone obey him as a commanding hero with Air-5 and Fire-5
                might do.

                Now again, if you prefer to play a version of the game where you
                emphasize depth over breadth, that's fine. But recognize that you
                have changed the rules as written. I personally am a big fan of
                changing the rules. But you have to know your starting point before
                you can go changing things around.

                > Anyone with a higher applicable element should have a huge advantage
                > in a direct conlfict with someone with a lower element. That's a
                > lot of what the elements mean -- you are buying far greater power
                > in the field in question, and are paying for it by taking
                > weaknesses in other fields. -Both- of these need to come into
                > play -- a 9/6/3/2 character isn't in any balanced if they aren't
                > penalized for having two very weak elements. If the 9 and 6 are in
                > fire and earth, they should win any direct physical confrontation,
                > but should also run into situations where their incompetence at
                > perception, empathy, and communication are a major factor.
                >
                It almost seems as if you are lumping Magic in there as if it was the
                fifth element. It isn't. Again, we have the breadth vs depth
                dichotomy.

                By concentrating on Elements (or an Element), you are going for depth
                of ability. By concentrating on Magic, you are going for breadth.
                The Fire-9 hero has taken a truly remarkable depth of ability. The
                Magic-5 hero has taken a nearly as remarkable breadth of ability.
                The Fire-9 hero can do things related to Fire (say bring a mighty
                wall crashing down around everyone's ears), that a magic-5 Hero
                cannot hope to match. But the same Magic-5 hero can perform feats
                that the Fire-9 hero cannot hope to match.

                > Uh...no.
                > It's like saying "I spend 3 points on my invulnerability power, so
                > my power should have as much impact on the game as just spending
                > the same three points on Earth." (which, IMO, means it should be
                > far stronger, but not have the wide applications that a high Earth
                > score has; if you're charging 3 points for "invulnerable", I assume
                > it's frequent, double major, or just triple-major, since it sure
                > isn't versitile).
                >
                I used a sample power from the book for common ground.
                Invulberability is a Frequent/Twice Major power that makes you
                impervious to external harm.

                Points spent in one area do not have the same impact as points spent
                in another area. If they did, there'd only be one element, and no
                need for powers or magic.

                When you buy all elements at five, does each individual point have
                the same impact as if you'd bought Fire-8 and the others at 4? No.
                You've gone for breadth of ability. Had you purchased Fire-8, you
                would have traded some breath of ability for an impressive depth of
                ability.

                > >The 'strength' of a mage then *is* those additional abilities.
                >
                > And yet...magic costs double.
                >
                No, it doesn't. Saying that is discounting the points spent on the
                element itself. A Fire-5 Magic-5 mystic can fight pretty darned well
                without resorting to magic. The five points spent on Fire have
                bought Fire-5, with all that implies. The five points spent on Magic
                have then purchased a broad range of other abilities, some of them
                unrelated to Fire.

                I recognize that you want to make magic more powerful. But to
                maintain game balance you will have to sacrifice some breadth. Or
                run an all-mage game.

                A Thousand Times,

                LT
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.