240gp for Stoneskin (7) is probably erring on the side of cheap.
This is also a hell of a lot of work to code from fresh unless you happen to have developed some modules priorly...
Overall, though, I think this steps a lot on the toes of scroll-scribing. I'd rather see a functional system for scribing scrolls implemented than inventing new things whole-cloth. Not to say there aren't some nice ideas but...
240gp for Stoneskin (7) is probably erring on the side of cheap.
This is also a hell of a lot of work to code from fresh unless you happen to have developed some modules priorly...
Overall, though, I think this steps a lot on the toes of scroll-scribing. I'd rather see a functional system for scribing scrolls implemented than inventing new things whole-cloth. Not to say there aren't some nice ideas but...
Right now, herbalism is a god-send to clerics.Actually, almost any PC can become adept at Herbalism, even ones without the most ideal scores, and I think it's a real god send to the people that don't have healing in the first place.
Due to the ability scores involved, they're naturally good at it, and having a boatload of healing potions that they can actually use on other people means that they can (and do) buff themselves to kingdom come without fear of being short on healing. This is like having extra spells. Meanwhile, mages are naturally good at alchemy, but how does that help them?I would point out that a large variety of a mages spells are not directly useful to the mage, so it seems reasonable to me that the products of Alchemy are made for use by melee classes, or anyone other than the mage. (Which, almost any PC can become adept at Alchemy) Also, having a boatload of potions is a result of player efforts, anyone can do this, and no one is gathering components with more ease than you (except maybe those with higher base movement rate)
If implemented, this might actually open the door for some spell-swords other than clerics!
240gp for Stoneskin (7) is probably erring on the side of cheap.
This is also a hell of a lot of work to code from fresh unless you happen to have developed some modules priorly...
Overall, though, I think this steps a lot on the toes of scroll-scribing. I'd rather see a functional system for scribing scrolls implemented than inventing new things whole-cloth. Not to say there aren't some nice ideas but...
It does what Scribe Scroll should do, this is very creative, but to me it seems driven by an expressed dissatisfaction on what is available to clerics
Otherwise to me it seems like instead of enjoying the new culture and flavors of this persistant world, there seems to be a roaring personal "crusade" against the cleric class here. (pun intentional)
It does what Scribe Scroll should do, this is very creative, but to me it seems driven by an expressed dissatisfaction on what is available to clerics
No, it's more driven by a dissatisfaction with the lack of viable methods of creating an arcane magic using fighter. Still spell feat is fine, but it also means that you can't ever cast your highest lvl of spells in armour, and the whole "taking your armour off to buff then putting it back on" thing is annoying and breaks the flow of rp. It also does NOT do what scribe scroll does. You can't learn a spell from a gem, and you can't give a scroll to a pure class fighter to use, and you can't cast from a scroll while in armour here.
Interesting. I like the idea and the purpose behind it seems to allow more flow of these very Duskblade esque characters. I only worry that now we'll have sorcerers whom already have many spell slots, using these as their "Buff" spells and then keeping all the others to hold spells like Empowered Fireballs, effectivly giving them too much kill power.
I would love to see those sellable items able to be used for something besides Vistani fodder though.
Nothing, absolutely nothing, will make soloing safe or a good idea. You solo, then if the spawn is higher than what you expected and you die, who will bring you back? The cry of "oh, this will make people solo" is a ludicrously spurious argument. Those who solo will do so regardless, until they get it through their heads what a bad idea it is. Those who don't aren't going to do so just because they have a single-use gem of stoneskin that they had to pay over 1000 for.Sorry but I don't think you realize you are voicing your own assumptions and that the reality is different. If I can obtain the attuned gems you have listed here I have multiple non-caster characters that could solo their way to level 16 or higher without need of others and as reslut could solo every craft all the way to mastery as well and would hardly need anyone for anything PvP or PvM with the exception of the highest level dungeons where a cleric casting heal would be needed. I don't have the soloing mindset but if I can do it then many others can too. Soloing can be done with non casters now actually, but at least its not cost efficient enough to be worth it as a common practice, with each surrogate of actual spellcasters you add to the server you lessen the need for making relationships with the people who can do what you can not and at its very core that is what the anti-soloing designing of the server is all about, fostering the IC and OOC motivation to cultivate relationship that further your own goals.
but at least its not cost efficient enough to be worth it as a common practice,
i dont understand, why would i buy from the store when i could get it directly
from the caster?
if your.friends with a caster ,get them for free
more items to hoarde, encouraging solo
What might work on low level, low magic CoA doesn't necessarily work here. The level of power and ability to accrue wealth is far greater on PoTM. Personally I'd like to see the bard song and animal companion changes implemented here than the gem attuning.
Accurate clerical domains would cut down those trickery/magic combos. :hide:
Personally the attune gem idea crosses over from low magic to high magic feel to me, if not mechanics. I just would imagine it would fit in better with other settings rather than Ravenloft but its not outright impossible to be compatible too.
Personally the attune gem idea crosses over from low magic to high magic feel to me, if not mechanics. I just would imagine it would fit in better with other settings rather than Ravenloft but its not outright impossible to be compatible too.
I find it hilarious that whenever I point out that we're already knee-deep in High Magic as far as the feel and atmosphere goes, you're amidst those to constantly tell me I'm wrong. >__> Oh, but how the winds turn.
I don't believe we are already in that feel and atmosphere, is why. :D
Personally the attune gem idea crosses over from low magic to high magic feel to me, if not mechanics. I just would imagine it would fit in better with other settings rather than Ravenloft but its not outright impossible to be compatible too.
I find it hilarious that whenever I point out that we're already knee-deep in High Magic as far as the feel and atmosphere goes, you're amidst those to constantly tell me I'm wrong. >__> Oh, but how the winds turn.
I don't believe we are already in that feel and atmosphere, is why. :D
Even having a gem attuning system would not do it for sure but I feel we have already stockpiled the server with surrogate spell caster items in the form of loot that a craft to further equip characters would be overkill really. That's my stance. Green Monster has ideas, and we have good low STR archery options from a system suggestion he/she brought up before but I sincerely don't think this particular idea is needed or would change anything he/she wishes to change and would devalue spell resources further than I would be comfortable with. Low magic means magic is rarer, but the same ruleset and spell set are used as any other setting and it does in any way modify what character classes player's can or will play (http://www.nwnravenloft.com/forum/index.php?topic=21039.0). It changes NPCs and their cultures and it changes available loot options but it has been stated time and again that particular concessions have to be made to meet a Persistant World Set Up.
unless you are cool with DMs only handing out unique magic swords to whoever they please instead of them being something each player had the ability to go and get for their self. I would not particularly prefer that over having the hard-to-explain copies that perhaps some other character mine knows having one of the same.
unless you are cool with DMs only handing out unique magic swords to whoever they please instead of them being something each player had the ability to go and get for their self. I would not particularly prefer that over having the hard-to-explain copies that perhaps some other character mine knows having one of the same.
As a matter of fact? Yes, yes, I am. And I say this as a player who is less than likely to get a unique weapon because it's pretty clear that certain DMs don't particularly like me, and the rest just don't know or have an interest in me. I say this as a player who's been ousted from a DM event that the DM initiated TO me, because the DM wanted to give it to someone they liked better. On this server. I say this as a player who is the least likely to benefit from this, simply due to politics, and why do I say this? Because it makes sense - even as a PW server, if not especially as a PW server. Persistent World doesn't mean 'concede to everyone' either. And on Ravenloft being the guy with the unique weapon means you earned your merits, rather than 'oh hey, after farming this place fifty times I stumbled on it'.
Also, this isn't a case of 'whoops, there's more than one magic sword'. This is a case of 'hey, you know that one of a kind, ultra-legendary weapon that spans history itself and everyone knows about? I gots three!' Even then, if you wanted magic swords of this type, there's a simple solution to that: make them a particular brand of magic sword. You know what a magic sword can be? Something as simple as a +1 enhancement to it, and you know what that sword is called? 'An enchanted sword'. It has no legacy attached to it, it's just a particularly magical blade. You know what a magic sword that does 1d4 fire damage is because it has an enchantment placed on the ruby in its pommel? 'An enchanted fire-ruby sword'. No legacy, but its functionality is there.
I'll go ahead and put in an item request for scimitars with the same names as Drizzt's swords, Twinkle and Icingdeath. If it's 'just names', then it shouldn't be a problem in the slightest, right?Actually, good example, and I personally would not mind it. As long as it would be a +1 scimitar with d4 cold damage or something and not the +2 defender with dispel fire on hit properties etc. The class of the item matters a whole hell of a lot more for the sake of the server than the name, even you would agree. There is a stigma against Drizzt Do'Urden that would be a bigger roadblack than those weapons notoriety though. But that has become well off Green Monster's idea.
You do realize that such talks go on even now. And that any prior occasion of mentioning DMs playing favourites is immediately hushed up and warnings are given to the users that post such threads, right?
I don't even advocate the Attune Gem thing - I just find it questionable that the people who defend the server from the points I make, are making similar, to the same, points as I do, when it suits them.
[I did read this, just snipping it down to signify that I'm responding to it specifically]
i dont understand, why would i buy from the store when i could get it directly
from the caster?
if your.friends with a caster ,get them for free
more items to hoarde, encouraging solo
The caster has to buy the gem to be attuned. At great cost. If you'd read the whole thread, you'd know that you can't attune just any old aventurine you find in loot. It has to be a gem specially cut to hold the magical energies. So unless your buddy is both very wealthy and very generous, you're not getting them for free. If you're very luck, you're getting them at cost. And your buddy can't churn out a hundred of these a day, either. If your buddy can cast 3 lvl 5 spells per rest cycle, that's how many lvl 5 gems he can produce per rest.What might work on low level, low magic CoA doesn't necessarily work here. The level of power and ability to accrue wealth is far greater on PoTM. Personally I'd like to see the bard song and animal companion changes implemented here than the gem attuning.
If you mean CoA's Celestial Chorus bard song item, I'd have to vote no on that, despite the fact that I love playing bards of all sorts. On CoA my lvl 7 bard / 4 fighter can cause an entire party, including herself, to regenerate 4 hp per round for ten rounds, 7 times a day. That's just too powerful. She can likely solo just about anywhere on the server, but doesn't because I never find just killing monsters without anyone to talk to fun. If I wanted to do that, I'd play the OC.
I would, though, like to see the power of the bard song spread out a bit more across levels. Right now, it's just "meh" until lvl 11, then suddenly, drastically starts getting more powerful every level after.
The "low magic" argument is just silly.
"Waaahh...... people might go out and have FUN when they can't find a caster to bring along".
The "low magic" argument is just silly.
Whatever your thoughts on the statement that the server is low magic aside, if your suggestion is going to make the situation worse, that is a relevant observation.Quote"Waaahh...... people might go out and have FUN when they can't find a caster to bring along".
You know you're debating from a place of strength when you paraphrase your opponents as cry-babies :P
As opposed to the other side of the table consistently mocking, or calling people cry-babies, whiners and telling them to quit bitching whenever these matters come up in other threads - something that even some DMs are guilty of. My finely tuned kettle nostril smells black on you, pot.
The "low magic" argument is just silly.
Whatever your thoughts on the statement that the server is low magic aside, if your suggestion is going to make the situation worse, that is a relevant observation.
Quote"Waaahh...... people might go out and have FUN when they can't find a caster to bring along".
You know you're debating from a place of strength when you paraphrase your opponents as cry-babies :P
If these attune gems were added I'd never use them on my none casters cause they are just way over priced and frankly I'd rather have a caster with me anyway to get those buffs for free. :mrgreen:
You keep arguing that non-casters will suddenly start soloing if these gems are available. I say it's not going to happen. Because why? Because those players who have the soloing mentality are not making non-casters.I tend to think you are demonstrating a veiled soloing mentality by not recruiting the pieces you need that may be lacking, via IC.
actully you dont seem to be reading, since its been pointed out numerous times
there is enough items in game that.allow non casters to be effective to go out.
Perhaps the same could be said of all forum debaters. But enough words, have at you!
In loot tables. Which you have to either A) go out and get, requiring a caster, or B) buy from those who do go out and get, and put coin into their pockets. Meanwhile, loot tables are random meaning you're not certain to actually find what you're looking for.
Perhaps the same could be said of all forum debaters. But enough words, have at you!
:bat: :whip:
I wonder if I should point out the fact that a Low Magic server, and setting, by its very design, is one wherein it should be just as functional to play without a caster of any sort, as with one. So basing it on that.. yeah, what's it say when this server is clearly not one of those, going off of that criteria, and then having every single excuse against change be 'if you're having a tough time, get a caster! You can't survive without a caster! You'd be stupid to go without a caster!'
I wonder if I should point out the fact that a Low Magic server, and setting, by its very design, is one wherein it should be just as functional to play without a caster of any sort, as with one. So basing it on that.. yeah, what's it say when this server is clearly not one of those, going off of that criteria, and then having every single excuse against change be 'if you're having a tough time, get a caster! You can't survive without a caster! You'd be stupid to go without a caster!'
actully you dont seem to be reading, since its been pointed out numerous times
there is enough items in game that.allow non casters to be effective to go out.
In loot tables. Which you have to either A) go out and get, requiring a caster, or B) buy from those who do go out and get, and put coin into their pockets. Meanwhile, loot tables are random meaning you're not certain to actually find what you're looking for.
So, yes, let's all make friends with the casters, shall we? Let's base our character's friendships solely on what other characters can do for our own. Let the Paladin's best chum be the necromancer who can Stoneskin him. That's good rp, is it?
See.... no one is ever going to say "I'd much rather use up these gems I paid a fortune for instead of having a caster who can buff me for free". But they might say "It's more in-character for my NG ranger to use up some of these gems instead of accept the blessings of the Priest of Bane over there", and I think that'd be a good thing.
So... which is it? Is PotM a role-play based server where alignment and affiliations MATTER when choosing who to trust to work with? Or is it just "Team Power-Gamer" where we all buddy up to whomever can buff us out the wazoo regardless of religion and alignment?
I wonder if I should point out the fact that a Low Magic server, and setting, by its very design, is one wherein it should be just as functional to play without a caster of any sort, as with one. So basing it on that.. yeah, what's it say when this server is clearly not one of those, going off of that criteria, and then having every single excuse against change be 'if you're having a tough time, get a caster! You can't survive without a caster! You'd be stupid to go without a caster!'
Actually, I think it's much rather so that in a low magic setting, casters are much more powerful - and important.
That is why we wanted the crafting system to be able to produce many of the effects you'd otherwise only get from casters. The only alternative to attain a balance would be to nerf casters which is equally unpopular (and which we already have done to some extend already.)
To me its the intent that matters more than the actual act itself. Sure casting animate dead may be in the eyes of the dark powers worthy of a DP check but its why you did it that really catches their attention.
Ravenloft doesn't function on terms of 'good' and 'evil' in the first place. Just 'Order' and 'Chaos'. Reviving the dead, as zombies, or bringing them back to life, is a disruption of the 'natural order', therefor it is chaos, therefor it is a DP check. It's why, in another thread, someone pointed out that Liz back in the ML temple oughta be DP5 by now due to how often she resurrects people.
Um. What?
First of all, the entire point of Gothic horror is Good vs. Evil.
Secondly, Raise Dead is Conjuration. Not Necromancy.
Raise Dead/Slay Living: If the target of a raise dead spell fails his resurrection survival roll, he becomes an undead creature of a type equal in Hit Dice to his former level. Vampires are the most powerful creatures a raise dead spell can create in this fashion, and they retain any abilities they had in life. In campaigns where the Requiem rules are being used, characters raised as undead should be converted according to the guidelines presented in that accessory.
Casting this spell (or its reverse, slay living) requires a Ravenloft powers check.
Resurrection/Destruction: If the target of a resurrection spell fails his resurrection survival roll, he becomes an undead creature of a type equal in Hit Dice to his former level. Vampires are the most powerful creatures a resurrection spell can create in this fashion, and they retain any abilities they had in life. In campaigns utilizing the Requiem rules, characters raised as undead should be converted according to the guidelines presented in that accessory.
Casting this spell or its reverse, destruction, requires a Ravenloft powers check.
No, you're 100% absolutely wrong; morality in D&D is Good and Evil. Law and Chaos as defined by D&D are "ethics." Ravenloft is about Good vs. Evil, and it says that in virtually every published Ravenloft product. The reason you can't detect evil in Ravenloft is because the Dark Powers are trying to force characters to determine whether someone is Evil by using their own judgment instead of relying on the gods to tell them via magic.Um. What?
First of all, the entire point of Gothic horror is Good vs. Evil.
Secondly, Raise Dead is Conjuration. Not Necromancy.
Actually, the entire point of Gothic horror is 'morality', which, while sounding like Good vs Evil, isn't. Then there's the fact that scrying of any kind detecting Good and Evil does not function, but detecting Chaos and Law does.
Raise Dead point was still spot-on though. :D
Perhaps, but that's not a very good 'lore' explanation for it. :O Hence why I suggested what I did.right, the fact that it still has a chance of turning people into undead monsters is good enough
I'm sorta starting to get the feeling I should really just be treating the server as 'Ravenloft Lite: Cherry Flavor', rather than constantly expecting the full-on Gothic horror experience, and that if I do so I'll probably stop getting this twitch in my eye. :lol:
I'm sorta starting to get the feeling I should really just be treating the server as 'Ravenloft Lite: Cherry Flavor', rather than constantly expecting the full-on Gothic horror experience, and that if I do so I'll probably stop getting this twitch in my eye. :lol:
Maybe you should stop trying to 'fix' things, and just enjoy it for what it is.
Maybe you should stop trying to 'fix' things, and just enjoy it for what it is.
I'm sorry. I'll add 'having a sense of humor about myself' to the list of things not allowed. Though now I'm at an impasse.. on the one side, I'm not allowed to treat the server as a serious roleplaying setting, but on the other hand, I'm not allowed to show levity in order to cope with this fact if your disapproving of my little jest acknowledging the exact 'just enjoy it for what it is' mentality you mentioned is something to go by.
Is it time for derailing pics now? I think it's time for derailing pics now:
MEANWHILE, IN FAERUN!
(http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20081013204034/forgottenrealms/images/1/1f/4e_gnolls.jpg)
..you knocked over scented candles and set fire to the hotel?
As to the idea from the OP, it's not bad per se. I just prefer tying things into the crafting systems more so that it relies more on collaboration and less on just gold and level. This also make things in terms of progression less linear (not all tied up to the same dungeoning and looting).
Not to mention, it would just give the existing caster more power more or less freely.
An interesting way to overcome this - and perhaps facilitate a wider economy was if we could somehow meaningfully make an ingredient system. That way, casters would fund their spellcasting through selling attuned "gems" (or whichever we settle on) and there would be a meaningful interdependency. But a full blown ingredient system would be time consuming to implement and easily be a lot of extra (possibly frustrating) management for the casterss.
I like the original idea in theory btw as a long term CoA player and having fun missle-storming the crap out of people as a level 7 fighter there but you can see where the imbalance would happen here with the level and power range of PotM. They were a sparse rarity on a server that you could only gain xp and gold through scripted quests and the odd DM spice on and would come with a price tag to match. Neither would have that sort of barrier the cost and process of manufacture there proved here.
As to the idea from the OP, it's not bad per se. I just prefer tying things into the crafting systems more so that it relies more on collaboration and less on just gold and level. This also make things in terms of progression less linear (not all tied up to the same dungeoning and looting).
Not to mention, it would just give the existing caster more power more or less freely.
An interesting way to overcome this - and perhaps facilitate a wider economy was if we could somehow meaningfully make an ingredient system. That way, casters would fund their spellcasting through selling attuned "gems" (or whichever we settle on) and there would be a meaningful interdependency. But a full blown ingredient system would be time consuming to implement and easily be a lot of extra (possibly frustrating) management for the casters.
One of the things I'm trying to address is the "spell-sword" build (fighter/mage, fighter/sorc, fighter/bard, et cetera) which, even though it isn't as powerful as the cleric due to drastically less hp and ab, is nevertheless fun. Here, it's just not a viable build. At all. The lack of wands, and scrolls here invoking armour penalties, just makes it impractical. An attune gem ability, perhaps with a limit of one per day, would allow such builds to effectively save up spells for when they're needed.
I'm just trying to make a suggestion that would benefit many a bit, benefit a few a LOT, and HURT NO ONE. And yet I get a firestorm in response.
..you knocked over scented candles and set fire to the hotel?
Well... No, we ravaged a small community of weak, non-furry humans... It's a polish tradition.
Anyway, lets be nice to Green Monster now folks? :)
Ah, reminds me of my honeymoon.
Ah, reminds me of my honeymoon.
Man, you Aussies are crazy.
As to the idea from the OP, it's not bad per se. I just prefer tying things into the crafting systems more so that it relies more on collaboration and less on just gold and level. This also make things in terms of progression less linear (not all tied up to the same dungeoning and looting).
Not to mention, it would just give the existing caster more power more or less freely.
An interesting way to overcome this - and perhaps facilitate a wider economy was if we could somehow meaningfully make an ingredient system. That way, casters would fund their spellcasting through selling attuned "gems" (or whichever we settle on) and there would be a meaningful interdependency. But a full blown ingredient system would be time consuming to implement and easily be a lot of extra (possibly frustrating) management for the casterss.
One of the things I'm trying to address is the "spell-sword" build (fighter/mage, fighter/sorc, fighter/bard, et cetera) which, even though it isn't as powerful as the cleric due to drastically less hp and ab, is nevertheless fun. Here, it's just not a viable build. At all. The lack of wands, and scrolls here invoking armour penalties, just makes it impractical. An attune gem ability, perhaps with a limit of one per day, would allow such builds to effectively save up spells for when they're needed.
As to "giving the caster more power more or less freely", I'd have to argue that it's not much more considering that only self-targeting spells can be stored in gems, and that it would cost the caster a lot more to create one than any existing craft. And it's especially not a great deal more if the caster were limited to producing only one such gem per rest period.
I've been meleeing as a mage since like, level 6. You'll never be as good as a fighter, but that doesn't mean you can't do it.
I've been meleeing as a mage since like, level 6. You'll never be as good as a fighter, but that doesn't mean you can't do it.
Also, other mages will ridicule you mercilessly.
I've been meleeing as a mage since like, level 6. You'll never be as good as a fighter, but that doesn't mean you can't do it.
Also, other mages will ridicule you mercilessly.
Ironic since Alexias wrote the book on reactionary wizards and how not to be a one trick pony. A mage for all seasons. <3
In her words:
"Many use magic, fewer will ever understand it."
I've been meleeing as a mage since like, level 6. You'll never be as good as a fighter, but that doesn't mean you can't do it.
Also, other mages will ridicule you mercilessly.
Well, I wouldn't, but that's because I'm hopelessly struggling to pull off my own type of spell-sword roleplay with Poet and such. It's pretty tough, especially since I'm built for roleplay, not for survival-at-all-costs.
Alchemy and herbalism were by far the quickest progression for me. Smithing was laboriously tedious and usually outdone by most weapons on the loot tables if you're not fussed with going enchanted gear route. Bowyers/fletchers need more love too, they're labour intensive and the craft progression seems slow. I've made something like 20 bows now and not even got off level 1.