Temi wrote:I believe there are two questions at hand.
Since knights and mages have the same access to the same combat and armor systems, but mages also have magic, do the disadvantages of using magic equal the benefits of magic (all is balanced), do the disadvantages of using magic exceed the benefits of using magic (in favor of the knights), or do the disadvantages of using magic pale in comparison to the benefits of using magic (in favor of the mages)?
The other question is different: do we give enough support for different character themes? If you want to kill someone with high combat skills and plate armor, do you have to yourself have high combat skills and plate armor? Should you have to?
Ahh, Temi, I love it when you bring that awesome brain of yours to the table. I'm gonna take a shot at these questions, and let's hope I don't get slaughtered by smarter people!
Do the disadvantages of using magic exceed the benefits?
If you are caught, yes. If not, no. The gap between the two? Risk. So the real question in my mind, is 'does the risk of using magic exceed the benefits gained by taking the risk?
This definitely comes down to the disposition of the player because risk is subjective. To rate a risk, you look at the probability of it happening, versus the impact it has. So, using magic - in any given instance, if taking precautions, the probability of being caught is low. Most mages do take precautions, and we have several in game that are ages old
right now. Basically, it depends on what the mage is up to, and how dangerous their chosen action is. Highly visible = highly risky.
The impact is death, so whatever makes a mage come out has to be worth their life
to them, which is a pretty powerful reason to stay under cover. Overall, however, being willing to put your neck on the line for great RP is something that will really depend on the individual, as well as the specific cause. Can we expect them just to willy-nilly kidnap and mayhem? No. And thank god, because believe me, when mages know their stuff and organize, devastation follows. Simple as that.
I think some mages feel that they don't have enough option/skill for concealment when acting? What this tells me by extrapolation is that the best focus of staff energy is spells that are concealed - if we want those spells in game - and maybe spells to conceal spells. Those are things mages will eat up like candy when we go into magic design. But, if we as staff make them too in-obvious, no one will feel or see mages/magic in the game.
Things we can introduce and concentrate on would be spying spells, alarm spells, annoying spells, etc. Frankly, I want to put love spells in the game and that sort of thing.
Do we have enough support for the character themes?
This isn't for me to answer, but players. Generally, I think we support all of the groups in the same way by providing guilds and the like. The issue that brought up this thread, however, is punishment.
We have a clear-cut result of being caught being a mage. Heretics should also (mostly, but not always) be getting lesser punishments, which we went through the trouble of producing a Book of Penances to describe. Also, it shouldn't be typically obvious to the Order if they're dealing with a mage or heretic. (
My OPINION: I would like to see the knights not pressure the Order to kill people as it did Lauris ab Novembris, the Grand Inquisitor back on TI2. It's the Inquisition's bailiwick to make those decisions, and I support Benedictus' stance on not killing people unless it's clear-cut necessary. This being said, I also support that when the GI hands down a sentence, that is the sentence. Inquisition appeals should be pushed to the GI.
End My OPINION.)
Thieves shouldn't be under death penalties for anything short of treason. For them, it'd probably periods of lockup (not to exceed 2 OOC weeks), branding, lost fingers/limbs, public tattoos to warn people of thievery, fines, forced labor/community service/slavery, etc.
This does bring up one thing - Treason.
Treason is a very specific thing. I've seen it used in ways that are not, in
My OPINION, correct.
Treason is a betrayal of the State on a massive level (eg, actually hampering its function or ability to exist). It is, for example, an attempt to kill the king. Killing a member of the Royal Council may or may not be treason. That's a judgment call for the Reeves to make. Attempting to kill any old noble is not treason. Smacking a noble is not treason. Talking smack about a noble is not treason. Smacking the king may be treason, as talking smack about him may be treason - but that is a judgment call for the Reeves to make. Generally, I'd really like people to consider whether or not something is really against the State or the individual, and whether or not whatever they did is really worth their death - because if not, other charges such as slander, assault, etc, would be more appropriate. Finally - the king is not the head of the Reeves, he cannot charge someone with Treason. He needs to ask/tell/demand that the Justiciar do it.
End My OPINION.
Note: My opinion does not need to dictate people's RP, I just want to make it known things I've seen on past games that have concerned me.
To my knowledge, the above has not happened on TI:L, only on past TI's (Julea's case, for example, was presided over by a Reeve and the Grand Inquisitor both (my understanding is the GI settled for exorcism after some politicking)).
