Rules talk:Pending Changes

Conquest

I think that having a set of conquest rules will be an excellent opportunity to inspire characters want to get higher power.

Perhaps the best thing would be to base it off something. Risk, for example -- Each army consists of a certain number of units, and in our case, power wielders would be worth a lot more units than mortals, and stronger (PLwise) power wielders would be worth more units than their lesser brethren. Then, one side attacks another, dice are rolled, and both sides take casualties. Ultimately, the side with the bigger numbers wins, though we may incorporate a few subtleties to make things interesting. Someone forgot to sign their comment.

Nerf of Extreme Tech Bias

as a player with characters who both have excellent and dismal bias i have to say that i do not like this new pending change the point of the advantage is to be advantaged especially with how hard it is to get excellent bias outside of racial template dismal bias has its advantage-granted side as well and i think it would be difficult to change around everything surrounding the best and worst bias where racial templates were involved when they're made increasingly mediocre please just leave them as they are i like them better the way they are now -- user vraeyda vraeyda 00 13 17 november 2007 est

i approve of this suggestion excellent and dismal were originally created to supplement those whose characters wanted to focus either purely on techs or purely on power level respectively and we've seen time and again that techs are pretty much what really matter reducing the effects of the extreme biases should allow us to narrow the gap somewhat between techs and pl via either reducing the number of techs one can get in a given time excellent nerf or by granting advantages for a disadvantage that is no longer as severe dismal nerf user tiryst tiryst 04 43 17 november 2007 est

if you adjusts the biases to not be so extreme are you guys also going to adjust the price function of enlightenment going from poor to neutral or neutral to good is still a 25 increase in your learning rate so i could see that costing the same 120 days with the same rate of failure but going from good to excellent doesn't produce quite as much of an effect i'm a little on the fence as to how i'd feel about changing the ct to accommodate the adjusted biases as that 15 drop from good to excellent is still significant i do like the idea of adjusting the biases themselves though i would still disagree with excellent bias working in tandem with mage doubling even after the adjustment user snackycakes snackycakes 17 41 17 november 2007 est

i don't feel a need to alter enlightenment no user tiryst tiryst 20 15 17 november 2007 est

as al wrote in the rule it it's about diminishing returns it discourages people from putting all their eggs in one basket so to speak which i feel is a more morally sound rping philosophy than the alternative -- user icebreed ice 23 50 17 november 2007 est

Reference Sheet Requirement

I'd actually like to suggest a concept for a new rule based on something i said in rules talk magic power to help app staffers handle techniques more quickly players could be required to keep a separate character sheet with full details on all techniques including costs as well as on any physpl template or special exceptions otherwise applicable to a character players would not need to make this sheet public in any way; they would simply name it a particular way such as character name - stats and then we staffly people could use the hosts interface to look them up it would make processing techs and upgrades easier as the player would not have to look up his own old techs all the time every time he wants to app for an upgrade for them the app staffer would not have to wade through dozens of correspondence and html fluff on reviewing old applications plus it would encourage the good practice of keeping all of a character character's information in one easy to access place the sheet could also be potentially given out to event moderators to help them get an idea of the character character's abilities though it would not be mandatory for a player to give up the sheet info to anyone but a staffer players who try to require tech sheets for entry into an event would be talked to punished purged from the earth i would not encourage use of the built-in approval function of the c-sheet system because approved sheets get automatically posted to a publicly assessable character roster for the room thoughts -- user icebreed ice 04 19 16 november 2007 est

this might require app handlers to start typing up an approved form of tech or something in their approval emails which would then get copied to this character sheet to be sure of standardization of it all other than that slightly extra work no problems coming to mind right now user tiryst tiryst 04 32 16 november 2007 est