Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Gamerlord]

Sorry, looks okay, but personally I don't like 'necromancers' that can't actually use death magic. Necromancers that only use negative magic sort of annoy me.

Hmm, I thought there was a general consesus that non-death necromancers were just wannabe black mages?

Yeah but the whole thing of a necromancer is that they practise death magic.

[Tsuchigumo550]

Exactly. Death= necromancer, no death= black mage.

[Dermonster]

Where's the bard?

There should be a bard class.

[Harry Baldman]

Where's the bard?

There should be a bard class.

Yeah, bards would be a good addition. Maybe give the bard the buffer abilities and let the priest focus on healing? Or perhaps add an alchemist class that focuses on healing and explosives. Because explosions are cool and stuff.

[Dermonster]

So this old thing is coming back.

Thought you ought to know.

[IronyOwl]

Sorry, looks okay, but personally I don't like 'necromancers' that can't actually use death magic. Necromancers that only use negative magic sort of annoy me.

Hmm, I thought there was a general consesus that non-death necromancers were just wannabe black mages?

Yeah but the whole thing of a necromancer is that they practise death magic.

Exactly. Death= necromancer, no death= black mage.

Yeah, I knew making the necromancer a not-pet-class would be terrible, but I didn't really know how to fit a pet class in, and necromancer seemed more succinct and common than Defiler or Black Mage or what have you.

Arguably pets could count as hindering enemies enough for raising the dead to be a more advanced ability, I suppose, but a full-on raise dead/drain life/curse/shadowbolt type necromancer would be waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too versatile for the simple archetypes I'm going for.

Where's the bard?

There should be a bard class.

Yeah, bards would be a good addition. Maybe give the bard the buffer abilities and let the priest focus on healing? Or perhaps add an alchemist class that focuses on healing and explosives. Because explosions are cool and stuff.

Well, the problem with that is that HP is one of the major limiters on how long you can be in the dungeon; you're not supposed to be able to recover it outside resting in town or very rare circumstances. I suppose I could focus the priest more on preventing or limitedly healing damage, but I get the feeling that'd just be a defensive buffer.

Or, put another way, why should there be bards?

[Harry Baldman]

Or, put another way, why should there be bards?

'Cause they're bards, silly. What sort of adventure doesn't have bards? Perhaps they should be knowledge-oriented - can identify magic stuff and monsters or something. And be terribly distracting.

[IronyOwl]

'Cause they're bards, silly. What sort of adventure doesn't have bards? Perhaps they should be knowledge-oriented - can identify magic stuff and monsters or something. And be terribly distracting.

Magic identification I don't like because it either becomes mandatory or takes the fun out of it. If by being terribly distracting you mean singing off-key while trying to seduce a barmaid and/or door while not wearing pants, I'd say that's more of an innate quality to being an adventurer than something you do instead of learning to fight with a sword.

[Harry Baldman]

'Cause they're bards, silly. What sort of adventure doesn't have bards? Perhaps they should be knowledge-oriented - can identify magic stuff and monsters or something. And be terribly distracting.

Magic identification I don't like because it either becomes mandatory or takes the fun out of it. If by being terribly distracting you mean singing off-key while trying to seduce a barmaid and/or door while not wearing pants, I'd say that's more of an innate quality to being an adventurer than something you do instead of learning to fight with a sword.

Well, I suppose you could play a bard within the class framework. Like, you'd be a Knight, but also a bard for flavor. Same goes for alchemist - could play as an assassin (guy who throws acid and makes walls of fire), priest (guy who makes and gives potions to his buddies), necromancer (guy with a sprayer full of poisonous chemicals and the will to use it), sorcerer (explosives expert) or eventually all of them at once while keeping the character consistent.

So, as long as such flavoring is entirely permissible, there should be absolutely no problem. In that case, however, you probably should just call the classes Tank, Bruiser, Blaster, Buffer, Debuffer to avoid all the "but Necromancers must have insta-death abilities immediately, and where's the bard class" discussion. You play what you want, but your roles can be switched and upgraded.

[lawastooshort]

I have another general question. Do people have any preferences for games being written in second or third person?

I mean turns. You roll a hilarious fail or John rolls an excellent success?

[Harry Baldman]

Well, second person can help make some humor work, but usually third person should be used if you want to make a single, connected narrative. Depends on the style of game, really.

[Dermonster]

I want a bard so I can be a female elf and use my long hair as an electric guitar.

Thats pretty much the only motivation.

[Dermonster]

I've found a D1000 mutation table.

http://www.lulu.com/shop/johnstone-metzger/the-metamorphica/ebook/product-20134312.html


Gentelmen, you know what must be done.

[Furtuka]

Roll to Derm?

[Dermonster]

Indeed.

Ochita is now a Bald bat winged immortal demonic horse with territory issues, by the by.