|
Post by Dionon on Feb 20, 2009 15:55:40 GMT -5
Guys.... no more masteries... They... are... gone
|
|
|
Post by Dullahan on Feb 20, 2009 15:57:43 GMT -5
When did that happen?
|
|
|
Post by Dionon on Feb 20, 2009 16:06:22 GMT -5
It's the system I'm proposing.... that's all... it's just people aren't getting it, and think I'm proposing a system inside masteries.
|
|
|
Post by Kaimontfendo on Feb 20, 2009 16:07:59 GMT -5
The whole "Masteries are gone" thing is foolishness in its purest form. Masteries are designed to make element-based characters easy and cost-effective to build, so eliminating both of those characteristics of the action is... oh. I already said it's foolishness.
Seriously, there will ALWAYS be Masters of Elements, regardless of what silly rules you try to implement... unless you eliminate elemental powers altogether, which would be just plain crazy, since they're the coolest powers there are, and they're all over in comics, too.
P.S. You've just multiplied my hate for the 2.0 project about 120 times.
|
|
|
Post by prodigy on Feb 20, 2009 16:13:22 GMT -5
Kai, I'm confused about your attitude toward the 2.0 project. In some threads, your helping the project, but in others, your flaming it. If you really hate it that much, then just go away. No one asked you to be here.
|
|
|
Post by malice on Feb 20, 2009 16:16:08 GMT -5
It's the system I'm proposing.... that's all... it's just people aren't getting it, and think I'm proposing a system inside masteries. You're proposing it, that doesn't make it so. However, don't take this as criticism. You took a risk (Pretending your proposal was ratified) to try and get something done. There's nothing wrong with that. I would've liked it if someone paid attention to my post where I suggested we need to talk about splitting and combining actions though. It's a mechanical aspect of the system that needs to be explored to really determine the best way to do Masteries. It was barely glossed over in 1.0. Ignoring mechanical concerns leads to responses like: The whole "Masteries are gone" thing is foolishness in its purest form. Masteries are designed to make element-based characters easy and cost-effective to build, so eliminating both of those characteristics of the action is... oh. I already said it's foolishness. Seriously, there will ALWAYS be Masters of Elements, regardless of what silly rules you try to implement... unless you eliminate elemental powers altogether, which would be just plain crazy, since they're the coolest powers there are, and they're all over in comics, too. P.S. You've just multiplied my hate for the 2.0 project about 120 times. ...which are not entirely unfounded if a little over-aggressive. Masteries need to be optimized. That's the whole point of having them. Making them into different action optimizes them to a point, but then you start wanting to combine actions... A lot of powergamer-haters will hate to admit it, but properly doing Masteries requires some extremely careful min-maxing. Kai, I'm confused about your attitude toward the 2.0 project. In some threads, your helping the project, but in others, your flaming it. If you really hate it that much, then just go away. No one asked you to be here. Since this is an un-official project that will ONLY work on people's cooperation, cool it. Same to Kai, same to me in another thread, same to everyone.
|
|
|
Post by takewithfood on Feb 20, 2009 16:22:12 GMT -5
Masteries came out a little (to a lot) too poweful in 1.0, so naturally we'd like to address that imbalance in some form. We might overshoot, but we have to try something. If we don't come up with anything better (which I found doubtful, but it's always a possibility) then it's not as though the old rule set will be lost. We can always revert/default to it.
Meanwhile, let's test some stuff out. If someone thinks a rule is broken in some way or another, then often the best way to illustrate that point is to build a test CAD (often just the relevant section of it) that demonstrates the problem. Saying "this isn't good" or some permutation thereof does little to get your point across.
And for Kai: Hate is not welcome here. Please, please tone it down.
~TWF
|
|
|
Post by Kaimontfendo on Feb 20, 2009 16:24:07 GMT -5
I'm here because nobody invited me! I figure someone has to attempt to keep the bad ideas from getting out of hand. If I can help by offering a suggestion that someone else can improve upon, I see no reason not to, especially since I could probably implement any good rules people come up with into my own games if I'd ever run one.
Besides, I'm generally more interested in the rules than actually using them for a game. (It's strange but true.) Considering how little interest I have in any of the games here, or starting one of my own, and how rarely I get to game with my local friends, I suppose that's good.
|
|
|
Post by malice on Feb 20, 2009 16:37:58 GMT -5
I feel I might be in the very ignorant situation of not believing Masteries were overpowered in 1. I thought they were pretty cool, absurdly expensive, and fun in implementation. However the low stone limits that are popular on these boards keep most Masteries from being viable at a decent AN.
Masteries WERE very cool and powerful if the player knew what they were doing though, but never overpowered as far as I had experience with them (Which was not a lot, I confess).
|
|
|
Post by Dionon on Feb 20, 2009 18:44:00 GMT -5
To Kai... Everyone was invited to participate in this experiment. Just because you didn't show up until the most unoppourtune moment isnt' my fault. Ideas are ideas, and should be tested, unless they are glaringly flawed, which, except for a select few, most have not been.
If you have no interest in playing, why are you on a board that plays MURPG. Yes we also discuss the rules, but it is almost always in the vein of putting them into practice in game play.
Malice, Your idea should be it's own thread, please make it so. It's a good idea and should be addressed
|
|
|
Post by Kaimontfendo on Feb 20, 2009 19:43:26 GMT -5
To Kai... Everyone was invited to participate in this experiment. I do not recall seeing any such invitation, and I do remember being told that I was not invited. So either I wasn't invited like someone else indicated, or you lie.Right... Which part of that were you thinking of when you insisted on your own idea of eliminating Masteries.I never said I have no interest in playing. I said I was not as interested in playing as I was in the rules. That's hardly the same thing. So, what would a Human Torch 2.0 CAD look like, and how much will his vastly increased cost make me want to vomit?! EDIT: Also, one of the great things about masteries is their ability to serve two functions while only using one action. With limited Actions per panel, that's an important benefit your idea throws on the scrap heap.
|
|
|
Post by Dionon on Feb 20, 2009 23:59:00 GMT -5
I don't remember anyone banning you... .and it was a general announcement that we were doing this.... So, either produce the offending post or shut the hell up. I'm truly perturbed at your assumptions here and am angered that you would ever call my honesty into question.
My idea is test worthy, and frankly, I couldn't give two toilet pebbles if you think so or not, Either you truly hate anything I've ever said, as we seem to disagree on just about anything, or you're intentionally attempting to piss me off. Congratulations, you're doing a smashing job.
And to quote you
That tells me that you have no interest in playing. I stand by my statement.
And once we're done making the system I'll show you the Human Torch's CAD... hell... I'm PM it to you personally upon completion. Vomit away.
And honestly, show me an example of true multi-function with a Mastery. All I've seen since I started playing was people just using one option a turn. That's some multi-function right there...
|
|
|
Post by GhostKnight on Feb 21, 2009 0:46:05 GMT -5
The multifunction is not a problem of the mastery, is a problem of how many stones you send to each action.
If a character has statecraft an ninja they can do a lot of things in a panel but they can't do all of them as good as if they just do one or two.
About eliminating masteries I would like to see an example of a master of elements. Personally I see many people trying to abuse the masteries.
My question "Mastery of Energy + immunity to element = invulnerability?", the reason I found this forum back in 2003, is one of them. This player comes to me and says that since a hit is made of kinetic energy and he is immune to energy than he is immune to hits.
Now, what is a mastery? A package to get a discount in a movement action, a forceblast, a forcefield, a limited immunity and telekinesis? Maybe a free transform self? These things are nice but they can be bought as singular actions.
I have no right to ask but please, take it easy! Discussions are better if we don't attack each other.
|
|
|
Post by Dionon on Feb 21, 2009 0:48:44 GMT -5
Honestly, any GM that rules Mastery of Energy includes physical damage needs a boot to the head lol... Also if someone let's that go, ok you're immune to damage...
*telepathically dominates the character*
And now you're my slave......
|
|
|
Post by Dionon on Feb 21, 2009 0:49:12 GMT -5
Though once we get the playtest started, if I am accepted, I'm going to be applying with a Master of Elements using my system (if allowed)
|
|