FinalHavenLarp.com

christen...your wall of text lost me after "maybe"...read it to me please?!?!?



two quick responces:

Now, Chris brought up that we’re adding a bunch of calls. I would argue that we’re not adding anything that isn’t already there. When someone casts Attack of the Elements, they call that. It is on the players to know what that means. It always has been.

its never been that way as long as I have been playing because the caster has ALWAYS had to read the "caster states" or" tell your target" part ... since my first event.

second, I am not a fan of the magical ammo clip for spells. Any player worth thier salt should be able to deal with a game stop just like calling damage or waiting for the car to pass other campers are driving. You my dear have your own damn salt truck and ya know it. Making a mage auot fire capable to avoid game stops isnt logical at all. Sure no one LIKES game stops, but they dont LIKe calling damage or taunt either. They would rather it worked like a holodeck...it just doesnt.
Mages need help and changes but this isnt what they need.

Game stop calls are explained. The victim doesnt need the details of the call.

Midcombat calls everyone needs to know. Those we want to keep static.

One thing about Game Stops - I bet there are plenty of fighters out there that occasionally love to hear a Game Stop - it lets them catch their breath and re-focus..Not saying I want more of them, but making a blanket statement about things should be kept to a minimum.

That said I am on the side of cleaning up Wizard (spells primarily) to bring them to where they should be-- I think they are playable just fine right now, we have several over at WH.. but I do think they could be better than they are without un-balancing the game.

Kyle: Why did they need to change to this version in the first place?

(I think) they could have kept the old system hugely viable, just by taking out the broken spells and going to a master GM list, and changing over to cool-downs, and leaving it a discipline.

Well, speaking on behalf of "they," one of the reasons (not the only reason) was an overwhelming number of complaints about "fairness," in that two disciplines in essence got unlimited skills while the others got four. Please don't respond with the "but those skills work differently" argument. We know that. We get it. That's why the second half of the plan was to supplement the new system with herbs and scrolls that would allow for something that approached what was there before, along with other path specific magic items along the way. That second half though did not get rolled out at the same time and is only just now being playtested/implemented.

For better or worse, we do get swayed by the "fairness" argument (which is why we are sympathetic to the wizards who complain about only being able to use their skills a few times per event while everyone else can use theirs continuously--see, I really do get it). The original rules were fairly balanced across paths, despite an unequal number of skills. Now all the paths have the same number of skills, and some would say that a few of those skills suck. You probably wouldn't get a lot of argument from some of us (though those people probably think that a new skill wasn't needed in that path to begin with).

There has been a lot of speculation that we changed the entire system because there were game breaking spells and potions out there and somehow we were unable to see that the simpler solution would have been simply to remove those from game. That is either underestimating out intelligence or overestimating our drive to change rules or both. If we didn't feel like there was something fundamentally wrong with the system, then I promise you we would not have devoted time to it. Are we happy with it currently? No, not entirely, though we would like to see the full vision play out a little longer to see what it looks like then.

I totally see your point Mike.

That was actually part of idea for the Discipline version that I stated earlier. With that, Wizards can strive for "Unlimited Knowledge' but not "Unlimited Power". Their brains can only handle so much at any one time.

They wold get a huge number of spells to choose from, but with a full 4 levels of a discipline, they only have a max of 5 to ever have on hand at any one time unless they take the time to "mimic" a new list of 5.

You'd never see any more spells coming from one person as with the current system at any one time(at least as a discipline).

You could even make a ruling that their max spells at any time is their current Discipline level x2, with spells taking up "slots" equal to their level of casting. So a max spellcaster could have, for instance, a level 4 spell, two level ones, and a level 2, all on hand at any one time.

After a set number of minutes, they could go to NPC camp to swap out any of those for any other spell scrolls they own. NPC camp would give them a signed sheet of what they are currently using. (Which incidentally, can be easily policed like character sheets).

I would remind you, Brian my dear, that this is but a SUGGESTION. A way to add / tweak some spells so that the magi can feel like a more active and useful part of combat. It's an idea... which is something that has been in very short supply of late. Plenty of folks have been grousing that 'Spell Casting sucks," but we've seen precious little constructive alternative to address that complaint.

Josh and I have an idea... one that doesn't at all fundamentally change the system, simply changes / adds a few of the spells. That's all.

I would argue that there IS an issue with spell casting... given that it is the LEAST played path in the game; I know that for a FACT, as I've seen the numbers. The best way to tell something sucks in a HIGH FANTASY setting... see what's not being played. ^_~

It's funny to see people saying they don't mind game stops NOW... but I can't even count the number of times I've heard that bitch on the field. Perhaps it's because those folks aren't active on the forums... either way, it's just ONE possible solution, and reducing game stops is but one aspect of that solution.

As for turning mages into 'ammo clips' we have that now. Fire Storm does exactly that. Yet THAT spell doesn't even have the kind of limitations that Josh and I propose for our changes. 3-5 charges of something make it no different than, in essence, a magic item. There's a reload between charges for a reason, so that there is no 'machine gunning' spell effects, as it were. Keep in mind as well... we didn't say to change ALL spells, just some. MOST people who play mages pick the same spells because there are some, let's be honest, that aren't great.

I'd also ask how many of YOU played under both magic systems, consistently, AS a spell caster. It's easy to say something's fine when you've never had to deal with it, nor have had to play it long term. I promise, playing something for a few years will given you a whole new perspective of what does and does not work well. What works and is sound in theory is not always so in practice. This is just one idea to help with that.

Criticism and debate usually make for better systems. More minds focused on a single goal usually produces a better result. Thus, pick it apart all you like as long as you remain constructive. I like a challenge. *wicked grin*

As to that I can fully say that I have never played a spell-using character in Final Haven at all. But if I were to have, it would have been as an Empath with the old Arcane as my major Discipline, just definitely with the cooldowns of Wizard versus the charge-ups of old Arcane, from what I saw of what spellcasters had to put up with to be truly helpful in combat, like being immobile so long that the combat moves on down the road.

All of my ideas are an amalgamation of that I know about the new way and the old way, with theories about what I think would be fun a give a feel of high-fantasy if I were to play spell-user.

And they are just theories. I personally think that if both versions met in the middle, they'd have the best "feel".

The answer is usually to meet in the middle.

One of the factors is that is it is much easier to start weak.(wizard.) and build it up rather than start broken and tear it back. PCs want a bonus, not another nerf.


I think the magic chance at it's heart was better. Less spells on the field, less powerful spells that you can get off more often. DO I think they hit to hard? yep.

I'd like to see how much change cooldown made this year.

I would also like to see some of the cool downs dropped or spells improved.

Marcus wrote: like being immobile so long that the combat moves on down the road.

i thought this was funny as hell. I imagine a caster saying some dramatac phrase (ala "you cannot pass!") and then the monster just walking away. meanwhile the mage yelling at him to come back

cooldowns were a big improvment yes. i aslo agree with CJ about empath arcane, the booms give you something to do between spells. i think thats why the focus items had something like that on them.

me and christen are going back and forth right now about what we want focus items to do for wizards, and im inclined to keep an effect like that on them.

I would remind you, Brian my dear, that this is but a SUGGESTION. A way to add / tweak some spells so that the magi can feel like a more active and useful part of combat. It's an idea... which is something that has been in very short supply of late. Plenty of folks have been grousing that 'Spell Casting sucks," but we've seen precious little constructive alternative to address that complaint.

I know ..sassy. I liked the notion as a suggstion, just not as a FH system. Hence why I posted my view on that suggestion. Didnt see anything in there that was of a flaming nature as I like Ark, and think he has value to add to such discussions. I like your brain too...

Josh and I have an idea... one that doesn't at all fundamentally change the system, simply changes / adds a few of the spells. That's all.

and I think it needs a fundemantal change. I still like your brain...

As for turning mages into 'ammo clips' we have that now. Fire Storm does exactly that. Yet THAT spell doesn't even have the kind of limitations that Josh and I propose for our changes.

What does that do...1 damage? No different than a fast firing archer. I mean clips of full on spells.

3-5 charges of something make it no different than, in essence, a magic item.

kinda my thought and why im opposed. it would mean giving them such an item each combat.

Criticism and debate usually make for better systems. More minds focused on a single goal usually produces a better result. Thus, pick it apart all you like as long as you remain constructive. I like a challenge. *wicked grin*

I then challenge the to touch thy elbow to thy ear...

So much liking of my brain-meats... Are you turning into a Zombie?!?!?

OMG - Brian has the Bathsalts!!!!

*then is sad*

Cannot has touch elbow to ear... I fails. T_T

Bathsalts? that would imply the orge bathes....silly girl...