Evoke Limit!

Post Reply
User avatar
Leech
Posts: 349
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2012 5:24 pm
Location: Behind you.

Sat Jul 12, 2014 9:34 pm

I wish that mages could evoke and keep more than one spell at a time, based on their TOTAL skill in magic (type AB, see how every skill type has a quantitative indicator of commitment to skills in that genre?)

People might think this'll make mages horrible OP. I think if it's just two or three, it might not be. Thoughts? Concerns? Could this be done?
Player of: Alexander ab Courtland

User avatar
Kinaed
Posts: 1772
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2011 8:54 pm
Discord Handle: ParaVox3#7579

Sat Jul 12, 2014 10:27 pm

Definitely not a fan here. It's not just about being over powered, per se, but more about the theme of magic. It's subtle. It's not easy. It takes planning. It's slow and cumbersome. It takes expertise.

On the scale of viability, it could be done, but it would be hard to do.

Dice
Posts: 477
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 6:15 pm

Sat Jul 12, 2014 10:50 pm

Two or three would be an extreme power increase but not, I think, an unworkable one. This might actually give mages a chance to survive direct confrontations, given that they had carefully planned. I think that theme of magic would actually be itensified, though, by being able to chain spells. Your planning is very limited by only having one at a time.

Certainly not more than three, though, by a long shot. And three might even be stretching it. Hmmmm.

User avatar
Kinaed
Posts: 1772
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2011 8:54 pm
Discord Handle: ParaVox3#7579

Sat Jul 12, 2014 11:03 pm

I'm not sure what we mean about mages being able to 'survive direct confrontations' - if we're talking about combat, that's not desirable in my eyes.

Rather, I'd like to see magic capable of framing people, finding out their secrets, applying misdirection, facilitating or easing the difficulty of tasks, providing warnings or alerts, adding options for clandestine communication, etc. Magic is a tool meant to be insidious and give you useful game perks, but is not meant to substitute or empower a mage to defeat a combat-specialized character in combat.

In particular, I feel that for the Inquisitors and Knights to remain a viable theme, they need to be effective at capturing and maintaining the capture of a mage.

Onyxsoulle
Posts: 150
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2013 11:46 pm

Mon Jul 14, 2014 10:52 am

I've been on both sides of this fence, the mage and the knight. From the mage's standpoint yes, having another spell loaded would always be helpful. However, it would actually make them OP. If a mage has enough proper power, they can retain the spell they cast, thus able to cast it again. I've run into one mage that actually had the same spell recastable 4 or 5 times in a row. Plus another added thing mages get is Mattack.

Knights on the other hand get a weapon and their numbers(though I think numbers are usually low). Knights can only attack from one side of the room if they have trained the proper weaopon, whereas a mage can attack from any distance. If two knights attack a mage and the mage has one of the 'blind' spells loaded, -poof- one assailant down, they can attack the other. Have it so that they can have 2-3 separate spells loaded at one time and suddenly what might be a fair(ish) fight becomes a slaughterfest.

So yeah, I agree that Knights/Order need to be helped before the mages are.

Dice
Posts: 477
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 6:15 pm

Mon Jul 14, 2014 11:51 am

Onyx, I see your points, but I have to ask you this:

When has a mage who wasn't a NPC ever defeated two Knights in combat? Or actually even one Knight? I'm not sure I've EVER seen it on TI:L.

The blind spells have a very minimal effect and won't take somebody out of combat; higher-rank spells are very unlikely to be retained for multiple castings, especially more than two; mages can only mattack from across the room with real efficacy if they're a maxed circle 5 archmage, and even then they're unlikely to have decent defensive skills to go with it.

There are very few spells directly useful in a combat situation and magic is evolving to make even fewer of that sort, which is one of the reasons I'm in favor of 2 slots instead of 1.

Geras
Posts: 748
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2011 8:50 pm

Mon Jul 14, 2014 3:48 pm

Dice wrote: There are very few spells directly useful in a combat situation and magic is evolving to make even fewer of that sort, which is one of the reasons I'm in favor of 2 slots instead of 1.
I'd rather just retain the useful spells and make spells more useful in general.

Onyxsoulle
Posts: 150
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2013 11:46 pm

Mon Jul 14, 2014 5:29 pm

When Arynon was the EM, he got hit by Breathbinder. This reduced str (and I believe con) by about 50 points for 5 hours. So there are some pretty tough spells out there, only having that spell cast once in combat is enough to slow a fight to a screeching halt, having it guaranteed to hit twice is devastating.

Also I'm reminded of what I was told in the original TI( I know it's evolved since then, but it seems this still applies), magic isn't for combat. If you want to be in combat, learn combat. Magery already bypasses a few rules, so I honestly think adding on would tip it too far in the mage's favor instead of leveling things.

Post Reply
  • Information
  • Who is online

    Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest