(Untitled)

Feb 06, 2007 10:34


Well, most of the stuff that confused people like terror has gone away, most of the stuff people cheated and did anyway like not running away properly for fear has been changed so thats what it does.

The weapon damage calls have been put in a straightforwards table, not bad idea. the descriptions for some  damage effects is a bit woolly with change ( Read more... )

Leave a comment

Comments 20

thewhitespider February 6 2007, 11:01:08 UTC
"change the base damage to X blah blah blah, they all seem to do the same things barring disease and decay."

I think that makes sense. It's so if I hit you for crush, and you're immune to crush, you're just immune to the bit that converts a 'normal' to a 'crush' and you still take a normal. Makes more sense than if you can be taken down by small hits but not by big ones.

I found it amusing that with sharp and blunt going away, we were being reassured that immunity to normal wasn't going to come back into play and then immunity to normal is used as an example in the explanations

But aren't immunities now all going to be chant-based? Which makes them a lot easier to get around, and Mute a lot nastier.

The forbidding changes are a little odd, see how they do in play, couldn't the same effect been acheived by just saying you can't cast spells while one is up? as it is it reads that anyone can stop your forbidding by casting anything at you as its a chant andyou can't counter.I suspect Forbidding was seen as massively overpowered and ( ... )

Reply

silks_ic February 6 2007, 11:04:01 UTC
"Sigils - don't Mage 3's get to carry around a little pack of sigils to give people when they cast things?"

That was what I thought
I could be wrong

Reply

thewhitespider February 6 2007, 11:06:49 UTC
It's possible, but I hear you're usually right.

Reply

silks_ic February 6 2007, 11:12:25 UTC
God I'm awesome

Reply


flangebeast February 6 2007, 11:19:09 UTC
"I found it amusing that with sharp and blunt going away, we were being reassured that immunity to normal wasn't going to come back into play and then immunity to normal is used as an example in the explanations :D"

Lammies that state "Immune to Normal" are still well away, and will not be coming back.
Lammies that give fast regen to Normal, or chant immunities will be coming back.

Reply

littlesnowy February 6 2007, 12:56:30 UTC
What about the silver bypasses regen? is that true both sorts of regen described say except silver on the end.

Well obviously they are typicals not exhaustive lists.

Reply

bunting February 6 2007, 13:37:43 UTC
Hmmm, I was sure that silver byepassed ALL regen.

But then I seem to have seen about a million different copies.

Reply

thewhitespider February 6 2007, 13:55:10 UTC
Far easier to avoid making a blanket statement and simple have all regen lammies say that they don't regen silver. It leaves the door open for monsters which do regen silver, but not, say, flame.

Reply


glenatron February 6 2007, 11:37:33 UTC
Chants with everything? So the Singing Sword we created in the Musical turns out to be a cornerstone of the new rules?

The legacy of Gloag lives on...

Reply


littlesnowy February 6 2007, 13:00:09 UTC
Just thought I'd say it a bit clearer as was a bit muddled.

I like the rules as a whole they seem consistent and not with any obviously broken bits. Which is very pleasing.

Am trying to get them straight in my head, hence the questions.

Reply

flangebeast February 7 2007, 14:18:56 UTC
I'm struggling to properly remember v2 now, and i still have a few events to go to :S

Reply


Leave a comment

Up