Whoa there, Nellie.

Whoa there, Nellie.:
[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Dioxide's CForum ]

Posted by Graatch(VIP) on September 07, 1999 at 04:41:41:

In Reply to: WHAT!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!? posted by Not Impressed on September 07, 1999 at 04:22:50:

Don't get your undies in a wad. There is no longer a specific number requirement. But Twist was pretty clear in his note that if he sees people just sloughing off on their spells, heads will roll. And knowing Twist (and I do), and Nep I suppose, they will be keeping tabs on it pretty closely for the near term, just to make sure people dont get all lazy.

As for their being no drawbacks or downsides to being a Master, well, I never really thought of the spell requirements as a drawback or downside. The check on a Masters power is not his requirement to perfect spells. That's a *strength*. No, the downside/drawback, the thing that makes master powers acceptable -- though they have greatly changed recently and that discussion is coming to the forum, I can feel it -- is that nobody needs to ever bear the brunt of them unless they choose. It is like arbiter powers in that regard. In some respects an arbiter can be overpowered, and cause you great annoyance, but -- and this is a big BUT -- only if you choose to break the law.
Masters are bound by the non-agression policy. If you dont want to feel the scourge of the violet spider upon you, all you have to do is not attack masters. It's really that simple. If you make a concious choice to make masters your enemy, you have exercised your free will and must live with the consequences.

So, lets not get all upset at the loss of specific numerical requirements.

I do find the irony delicious, however, that within weeks of eachother the Rager cabal institutes a skill perfection requirement (which I totally disagree with on a philosophical level, ragers should be the best warriors, and that should be proven by *fighting*, not by how many skills you have at 100%. I dont remember reading a fantasy novel that had the warrior saying to the squire, "Are you at 94% in yoursword?" No, he said "Go fight that man, if you win, you get to be a knight.") and Masters does away with their spell master requirement.

> > Masters no longer have pratice requirments. They dont have to master:
> > spells----rank
> > 10........35
> > 15........40
> > 20........45
> > 25.......hero

> WHAT!?!?!??!?!?!

> So, all of the downsides to being a master have been removed and now you got a cabal that has great powers without responsibilities? How bout we let sylvans stop protecting the forests, and ragers can use potions now, and dawn can kill lightwalkers on a whim, and hey, scarabites can group with Imperials and Arbiters now!

> If what you say is true, I spit in the eye of the person that made that decision.

Follow Ups:

Post a Followup

Name:
E-mail:
Subject:
Comments:	> Don't get your undies in a wad. There is no longer a specific number requirement. But Twist was pretty clear in his note that if he sees people just sloughing off on their spells, heads will roll. And knowing Twist (and I do), and Nep I suppose, they will be keeping tabs on it pretty closely for the near term, just to make sure people dont get all lazy. > As for their being no drawbacks or downsides to being a Master, well, I never really thought of the spell requirements as a drawback or downside. The check on a Masters power is not his requirement to perfect spells. That's a strength. No, the downside/drawback, the thing that makes master powers acceptable -- though they have greatly changed recently and that discussion is coming to the forum, I can feel it -- is that nobody needs to ever bear the brunt of them unless they choose. It is like arbiter powers in that regard. In some respects an arbiter can be overpowered, and cause you great annoyance, but -- and this is a big BUT -- only if you choose to break the law. > Masters are bound by the non-agression policy. If you dont want to feel the scourge of the violet spider upon you, all you have to do is not attack masters. It's really that simple. If you make a concious choice to make masters your enemy, you have exercised your free will and must live with the consequences. > So, lets not get all upset at the loss of specific numerical requirements. > I do find the irony delicious, however, that within weeks of eachother the Rager cabal institutes a skill perfection requirement (which I totally disagree with on a philosophical level, ragers should be the best warriors, and that should be proven by fighting, not by how many skills you have at 100%. I dont remember reading a fantasy novel that had the warrior saying to the squire, "Are you at 94% in yoursword?" No, he said "Go fight that man, if you win, you get to be a knight.") and Masters does away with their spell master requirement. > > > Masters no longer have pratice requirments. They dont have to master: > > > spells----rank > > > 10........35 > > > 15........40 > > > 20........45 > > > 25.......hero > > WHAT!?!?!??!?!?! > > So, all of the downsides to being a master have been removed and now you got a cabal that has great powers without responsibilities? How bout we let sylvans stop protecting the forests, and ragers can use potions now, and dawn can kill lightwalkers on a whim, and hey, scarabites can group with Imperials and Arbiters now! > > If what you say is true, I spit in the eye of the person that made that decision.

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Dioxide's CForum ]