|
Post by WildKnight on Dec 10, 2008 18:49:55 GMT -5
What Playah said, yes.
I mean, to me... you could argue that its overpowered for its price, but I don't see that its complicated at all. In fact its pretty simple.
|
|
|
Post by Jet on Dec 10, 2008 18:53:25 GMT -5
Not to mention- just about any magic user in Marvel IS overpowered. They can do almost anything for nothing, so yeah. I cant even think about one weak magic user in Marvel, who couldnt beat the crap out of avarage street superhero.
|
|
|
Post by WildKnight on Dec 10, 2008 19:00:16 GMT -5
Yes, but that doesn't mean it should cost so little within the game system. Thats the "balance" issue involved... the initial cost of getting magic is (arguably) too low.
Though, TBH, I'd only increase the cost of "secondary magic" (Witchcraft, Sorcery, etc) to AN +3, as I honestly believe that unlike with a lot of other really powerful actions, the magical ones require some creativity to use well (and magic is easily screwed with by intelligent GMs)
|
|
|
Post by Kaimontfendo on Dec 10, 2008 19:03:21 GMT -5
It seems to me that every rule I've seen for magic in MURPG is either overpowered or overpriced. In the books it's right up there with Power Cosmic in terms of what it can do, but nowhere near the cost. By contrast, every attempt at "balancing" magic-users makes them so weak I'd never care to play one, because they have to pay for every little thing. "You want to be able to flip through your spellbook without touching it? That's a +1 option, so it'll cost you another 5white." (yes, that's a joke, but it's not too far off. Heck, for that price, I'd rather get Destiny Force, knowing I won't get to use it more than three times in the whole campaign.
|
|
|
Post by Rinjo on Dec 10, 2008 23:20:51 GMT -5
How about just putting stones into sorcery to use "Fear" (renamed to "Counter-spell") that affects ONLY magical actions. It'll weaken or even cancel the spell its used against. And if nobody uses magical actions to counter- then we treat it like NORMAL canceling actions, which in turn we get half of stones back. This is the simplest I think you are going to get. So in the future if I ever try to counter spell, this is how I will do it.
|
|
|
Post by Rinjo on Dec 10, 2008 23:27:37 GMT -5
My thoughts all along have been that changing Magic is a bad idea. It is simple, it accomplishes it goal...
Now pricewise, it is a heck of a bargain. I think maybe keeping MoM he same and repricing sorcery and the like would be a good idea. Repricing only mind you.
Or maybe altering the branches slightly so they don't all do the same thing and pricing them accordingly... but overall magic is good as written... probably priced a little poorly...
|
|
|
Post by Neros on Dec 11, 2008 9:20:53 GMT -5
Great feedback guys Magic have also given me a good deal of headaches, which is why I dont use it and don't let my players use it.. But its a shame, cause there could be made so many great games with magic users.. I agree the good thing with the original magic rules is their simplicity (but MURPG is generally simple ), but they are so badly explained and has such a low cost that its really hard to play with... So in my opinion, if we don't make new rules, then we should atleast increase the cost of the original actions and add a better description to them.. One of the things I like about my version is that you could have two mages with the same branch, but they could still be different.. ========================= But about Counter Spelling, it does work like magical defense, except you can also affect others, large areas, add a duration and it could also prevent and opponentect from doing a spell of any kind.. like if a wizards starts to summon a Hellfire Demon, you could counter it.. But I also thought the simplest way would be the normal 1-for-1 stone concept..
|
|
|
Post by Rinjo on Dec 11, 2008 9:29:51 GMT -5
fear - called counterspell... remove stones from magical attacks. Bam
|
|
|
Post by Jet on Dec 11, 2008 13:52:08 GMT -5
fear - called counterspell... remove stones from magical attacks. Bam What I said earlier, but even shorter.
|
|
|
Post by Neros on Dec 14, 2008 12:54:54 GMT -5
Well then. thats how it will be done:)
But what are peoples thoughts about the new version magic? Do you want me to add it to the House Rule Guide or should the original magical actions just be revised and altered a bit?
|
|
|
Post by Rinjo on Dec 14, 2008 22:56:51 GMT -5
NO offense but I wouldn't use it so I don't know... generally I think it overcomplicates magic. It turns it into a mastery like any other which was never the itnent. It was designed to be a catch all powerset that let you pull of a variety of effects.
It would be cheaper for me to buy mastery of matter or something than your version of mastery of magic.
|
|
|
Post by WildKnight on Dec 14, 2008 23:18:31 GMT -5
Exactly.
|
|
|
Post by Neros on Dec 15, 2008 11:58:50 GMT -5
None taken rinjo I would like some more opinions about it, but for now i wont add it to the guide.. Ive planned on trying to run two scenarios which have allot of magic, so it would be nice if it was better explained and balanced at that time Any suggestions for this? One thing ive been thinking about allot, was to increase the costs for the branches and change some things with Mastery of Magic's blast and Barrier.. They arent to useful since it takes a panel for them to use it..
|
|
|
Post by Kaimontfendo on Dec 15, 2008 20:27:15 GMT -5
Well, on the issue of what to put in the House Rules guide, I'd say every variation possible is the best solution. That way, whichever set of rules a GM prefers for magic, she can choose, instead of only having one alternative to the original rules. ...But maybe that's just me.
|
|
|
Post by WildKnight on Dec 15, 2008 20:46:02 GMT -5
Can't say I disagree with Kai on that one. Having multiple paths to the same goal never hurt anybody (except maybe the horribly indecisive...)
|
|