|
4 years ago ::
Nov 02, 2009 - 8:59PM
#41
|
Date Joined:
Nov 27, 2005
|
So balance is a great thing, but I don't think DMs should hamstring the plot or kill variety just for the sake of "logic". If there's a land where magic hasn't worked since the Gods smote it with their fury, then magic just doesn't work there, or it works erratically. As a player, I'd feel almost cheated if the DM said "Well, magic's actually working great there now because it'd be unfair to you if you were cutoff from your power source . . ."
If they did it properly, I wouldn't mind, but if I came to the game all excited with mah shiny new warlock only to be told "Hey, you should roll up a fighter for the first half of the campaign" I'd be a little miffed.
Zammm = Batman. Bronies unite."I'd call you a genius, but I'm in the room." It's my sig in a box
Show
Everything is better when you read it in Bane's voice.
Your human antics and desire to continue living have moved me. Just kidding. You cannot move me physically or emotionally. Wall humor.
Copy effects work like a photocopy machine: you get a copy of the 'naked' card, NOT of what's on it.
Funny story:
InQuest Magazine (I think it was InQuest) had an oversized Chaos Orb which I totally rooked someone into allowing into a (non-sanctioned) game.
I had a proxy card that was a Mountain with "Chaos Orb" written on it. When I played it, my opponent cried foul:
Him: "WTF? a Proxy? no-one said anything about Proxies. Do you even own an actual Chaos Orb?"
Me: "Yes, but I thought it would be better to use a Proxy."
Him: "No way. If you're going to put a Chaos Orb in your deck you have to use your actual Chaos Orb."
Me: "*Sigh*. Okay."
I pulled out this huge Chaos Orb and placed it on the table. He tried to cry foul again but everyone else said he insisted I use my actual Chaos Orb and that was my actual Chaos Orb. I used it, flipped it and wiped most of his board.
Unsurprisingly, that only worked once and only because everyone present thought it was hilarious. 
My DM on Battleminds:
no, see i can kill defenders, but 8 consecutive crits on a battlemind, eh walk it off.
Hi guys! So, I'm a sort of returning player to Magic. I say sort of because as a child I had two main TCG's I liked. Yu-Gi-Oh, and Pokemon. Some of my friends branched off in to Magic, and I bought two pre-made decks just to kind of fit in. Like I said, Yu-Gi-Oh and Pokemon were what I really knew how to play. I have a extensive knowledge of deck building in those two TCG's. However, as far as Magic is concerned, I only ever used those two pre made decks. I know how the game is played, and I know general things, but now I want to get in the game for real. I want to begin playing it as a regular. My question is, are all cards ever released from the time of the inception of this game until present day fair game in a deck? Or are there special rules? Are some cards forbidden or restricted? Thanks guys, and I will gladly accept ANY help lol. 
I have the same problem with women.
Is this my new ego sig? Yes it is, other Barry
Show
And that's why you should never, ever call RP Jesus on being a troll, because then everyone else playing along gets outed, too, and the thread goes back to being boring.
See, this is why RPJesus should be in charge of the storyline. The novel line would never have been cancelled if he had been running the show. Specifically the Slobad and Geth's Head talkshow he just described.
Not only was that an obligatory joke, it was an on-topic post that still managed to be off-topic due to thread derailment. RP Jesus does it again folks.
I think I'm gonna' start praying to Jesus... That's right, RPJesus, I'm gonna' be praying to you, right now.
O' Jesus
Please continue to make my time here on the forums fun and cause me to chuckle.
Amen.
It was wonderful. Us Johnnies had a field day. That Timmy with the Grizzly bears  would actually have to think about swinging into your Mogg Fanatic  , giving you time to set up your silly  combo  . Nowadays it's all DERPSWING! with thier blue jeans and their MP3 players and their EM EM OH AR PEE JEES and their "Dewmocracy" and their children's card games and their Jersey Shores and their Tattooed Tenaged Vampire Hunters from Beverly Hills 
Seriously, that was amazing. I laughed my *ss off. Made my day, and I just woke up.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Nov 02, 2009 - 9:26PM
#42
|
Date Joined:
Jun 10, 2009
|
that would work for a small group of 4 people though no controller would make minions a pain in the arse
Actually - we're playtesting a martial controller :D
Through the ages, many would wonder "Does art imitate life or does life imitate art?"
I wonder "Does the art of discourse on the internet imitate the art of discourse in life or does the art of discourse in life imitate the art of discourse on the internet?"
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Nov 02, 2009 - 9:32PM
#43
|
Date Joined:
Sep 26, 2001
|
Now that spellcasters are on par with everybody else (to the point that there's no point in really differentiating spellcasters from everybody else), there's absolutely no reason for it to exist again.
If the various 'caster' power sources are on par with the martial power source, why is the martial source the only one that can't fill all 4 roles?
I think there could still be a place for anti-magic. But, it couldn't be the 'you loose' button it used to be, it'd have to work like any other 4e condition-inflicting zone.
Love 4e? Concerned about its future? Join the Old Guard of 4e"You want The Tooth? You can't handle The Tooth!" - Dahlver-Nar. "If magic is unrestrained in the campaign, D&D quickly degenerates into a weird wizard show where players get bored quickly" - E. Gary Gygax
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Nov 02, 2009 - 10:18PM
#44
|
Date Joined:
Jan 15, 2004
|
In terms of a single encounter, localised effects might be interesting. By localised, I mean squares or zones (up to say 3x3), that characters and foes could be moved into and out of, and take cover behind. Blanket effects over the entire encounter area would be just annoying.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Nov 02, 2009 - 10:22PM
#45
|
Date Joined:
Sep 26, 2003
|
Another problem with 'Anti-X' field is that...well it doesn't work on monsters! Monsters don't have power source keyword, so there would be no way to have antimagic fields affect monsters and players equally like other terrain features.
You say "this monster uses magic, so its affected". Voila.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Nov 02, 2009 - 10:27PM
#46
|
Date Joined:
Jun 30, 2008
|
Another problem with 'Anti-X' field is that...well it doesn't work on monsters! Monsters don't have power source keyword, so there would be no way to have antimagic fields affect monsters and players equally like other terrain features.
You say "this monster uses magic, so its affected". Voila.
So essentially go back on ALL the monsters in the game and slap power source keywords on all of them? Just to make them work with that silly mechanic?especially since a LOT of monsters don't have an obvious power source. Is the Owlbear using the Martial Powersource to maul you or Arcane since its from the Feywild? Eitherway I'm gonna bleed after that.
I love Horseshoecrabfolk.
What I love most about them is that they seem to be the one thing that we all can agree on.
See for yourself, click here!
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Nov 02, 2009 - 10:34PM
#47
|
Date Joined:
Mar 22, 2008
|
I didn't say 'a combat', I said 'an encounter'.
If it's not combat, power loss is fairly meaningless.
Wizard: "Doh! I can't do magic, so now I can't help negotiate with the Prince!"
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Nov 02, 2009 - 10:34PM
#48
|
Date Joined:
Sep 25, 2005
|
Anti-magic was removed for the same reason that every character was given the ability to heal themselves. 4E sacrifices some concepts for the greater goal of "fun." They've given you (mostly) balanced mechanics to work with, and you can re-label the fluff associated with them however you see fit. There are tons of status effects available that lock down a character either for a round or until they save, but it's not fair to lock down one class of character while another is immune to those effects. That's giving an unfair advantage to one group over another, and 4E isn't about that. If you want to create an anti-magic field, it needs to be an anti-martial, anti-primal, anti-divine field, too.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Nov 02, 2009 - 10:41PM
#49
|
Date Joined:
Mar 22, 2008
|
If you want to create an anti-magic field, it needs to be an anti-martial, anti-primal, anti-divine field, too.
No there doesn't. If done properly as a story element, you can use any one of those, all of those, or any combination you want to. There's no need to make it hit everyone if you're not slamming people with it in combat.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Nov 02, 2009 - 10:58PM
#50
|
Date Joined:
Sep 25, 2005
|
If you want to create an anti-magic field, it needs to be an anti-martial, anti-primal, anti-divine field, too.
No there doesn't. If done properly as a story element, you can use any one of those, all of those, or any combination you want to. There's no need to make it hit everyone if you're not slamming people with it in combat.
First they came for the spellcasters, but I wasn't a spellcaster, so I said nothing...  The need is to make it affect all players equally. Granted, a melee character is going to be more hosed by an immobilization effect than a ranged one, and there are, I'm sure, other statuses that have a more pronounced effect on one type of class than another, but the status itself is still the same. Even with those discrepancies in mind, an anti-magic field is something above and beyond them. Saying to two players that just got hit by the same effect that Joe can't do anything, while Sam can operate normally is completely unfair. You shouldn't be singling out a character just because of the power source they use. Change the fluff all you want, but don't mess with the crunch. If you're concerned about anti-magic as a story element, then you can certainly call it some sort of psychic feedback or debilitating aura that dulls the mind and stuns them or dazes them. There's no need whatsoever to make Joe go watch TV.
|
|
|
you loads
