Go
back to previous topic |
Forum Name |
Gameplay |
Topic subject | Shifter Forms Rant |
Topic
URL | https://forums.carrionfields.com/dcboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=6&topic_id=41282 |
41282, Shifter Forms Rant
Posted by The Heretic on Wed 31-Dec-69 07:00 PM
I am going to apologize in advance to the Imms. Sorry.
Balance-wise shifter forms are fine.
But looking at the actual forms they are horrible. Why are barnyard and zoo animals being used at all in a fantasy game? It is unimaginative and a detriment to the RP atmosphere. Conjurer familars are better fantasy creatures than shifter forms. And all that's really needed is to throw the word 'phase' in front of wasp and you've got something interesting.
Look at the low lever forms...you've got squirrels, toads, ferrets, swans. Lame. Good work on coding of the forms. Bad work on the creature names.
A quick search can find plenty of inspiration. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lists_of_Dungeons_%26_Dragons_monsters http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mythical_creature But I should not be able to turn on the National Geo channel to see any creature that a shifter can assume.
In summary, I give you the third tier utility form, Cat:
An orange and white tabby meows plaintively at you like it wants some food. It purrs contentedly when you reach down and pet it, but then you make a quick movement, and it yelps and leaps away. You hear a hissing from it somewhere around you but can't see the cat wherever it went and hid itself.
Str : 17 Int : 15 Wis : 15 Dex : 21 Con : 18 Chr : 18 Hitroll : 38 Damroll : 23 AC pierce : -280 Divinely armored AC bash : -280 Divinely armored AC slash : -280 Divinely armored AC magic : -280 Divinely armored AC element: -280 Divinely armored
Physical effect: 'form bonus' modifies dexterity by 2 for -1 hours.
Skills Bite : Bite your opponent Hide : Hide Nap : Go to sleep anytime
Automatic Abilities Sneak : Always sneaking Dodge : Excellent Dodge Ability
This fearsome creature has been known to slay red dragons, nap on sunny windowsills, and devour copious amounts of lasagna.
Is this seriously a shifter form?
|
41312, RE: Shifter Forms Rant
Posted by highbutterfly on Wed 31-Dec-69 07:00 PM
>Look at the low lever forms...you've got squirrels, toads, ferrets, >swans. Lame. Good work on coding of the forms. Bad work on the creature >names.
Disagree here. It's a classic in tons of famous fantasy books and series, comics, cartoons, and movies, from Eliot's Sword in the Stone to Butcher's Dresden Files to McKilip's Riddlemaster to Robert Jordan to Terry Goodkind, to name a few, not to mention mythologies such as Chinese, Japanese, Egyptian, Greek, Bablyonian, Native American, British, German, Norse, that mages can easily transform themselves into natural creatures but not magical ones without extreme measures, being the son of a god, etc.
I think it's well done. It's also possible that a magical form is different than the actual animal ("no NATURAL animal would have claws that long and sharp" is a classic trope).
|
41301, RE: Shifter Forms Rant
Posted by Isildur on Wed 31-Dec-69 07:00 PM
Um. There are mundane animals in most fantasy worlds. Shapeshifters typically turn into a variety of shapes, some mundane and some not. One example would be Prof. McGonnagal from the Harry Potter books, who turns into...a cat. Among other things.
|
41304, RE: Shifter Forms Rant
Posted by The Heretic on Wed 31-Dec-69 07:00 PM
True. But the cat form as described in CF seems to have some fighting ability and is a 3rd tier form. This is where the design loses me. If you want to have a cat it should be 1st or 2nd tier and have no fighting abilities. As soon as it can do more it should be described as being more.
Mundane in CF is not the same as mundane in our world. Shifter forms are common in our world but not really fitting for CF. They do more to break RP atmosphere than reinforce it.
|
41308, No fighting abilities?
Posted by Homard on Wed 31-Dec-69 07:00 PM
http://www.yourhoustonnews.com/cleveland/news/article_3f8b7022-782a-11e0-b12d-001cc4c002e0.html
|
41309, Yeah, cats can fight.
Posted by Tsunami on Wed 31-Dec-69 07:00 PM
They will rip your face off. I'd rather fight a dog than a cat any day.
|
41297, Cat is an excellent form for a tribunal.
Posted by DurNominator on Wed 31-Dec-69 07:00 PM
Especially if the other guy is a scary rager. You can sneak in and manacle the rager when he attacks your guild and not autoassist and let the guards beat the rager if the can. I used this tactic against Arrazn as Agantas, except that I forgot the not autoassist part and got waxed.
|
41292, Two arguments against it
Posted by MoetEtChandon on Wed 31-Dec-69 07:00 PM
1) I don't mind generic animals for non-quest forms. You now at least have 'some' idea on what you can expect. And what would be special about a quest form if it doesn't stand out at all (other than through the stats)?
2) I personally think Shifters have been given WAY too much attention already, compared to other things.
|
41293, I disargree with your first point and...
Posted by Alston on Wed 31-Dec-69 07:00 PM
Agree with your second.
The shifter forms are rather lame and they do not always match what I would expect from them. Ram is a good example. It get's multiple attacks bit have you ever watched rams fight?
I couldn't agree more than I do with the original poster. I don't like shifters and I think they are terrible for RP. Both in a Practical sense (For other reasons he didn't mention.) and because of the level of randomness involved.
|
41303, Basically the randomness is the only thing I like about them
Posted by MoetEtChandon on Wed 31-Dec-69 07:00 PM
Other than that I find them extremely boring because they inhibit interaction and are just a pretty flavorless class.
They also have some advantages because of OOC game mechanics, something I personally don't think is a good idea.
|
41285, Don't you think...
Posted by Homard on Wed 31-Dec-69 07:00 PM
That if Ice Drake and Displacer Beast were standard shifter forms that they might be even more popular than they are currently?
|
41287, RE: Don't you think...
Posted by The Heretic on Wed 31-Dec-69 07:00 PM
Do you think these forms are some kind of win button? They belong in a fantasy realm far more than a fox or a cougar. The strength of the forms depends on the coding. I'm not worried about that. IMHO, something fantasy should be given as third and fourth tier forms. If common animals are in the game they should be limited to the first and second tier. For example a lion, with some modification to damage output, should be second tier.
|
41288, It's about appeal, not a "win button."
Posted by Homard on Wed 31-Dec-69 07:00 PM
Part of designing balance is to make sure that each class has enough incentives AND drawbacks to make it popular, but not overwhelmingly so.
If you make Red Dragon a fourth tier form (even if it's not any more powerful than current forms of that tier) you'll see even more shifters around.
I'm inclined to think that this wouldn't be a good thing.
|
41294, I think it's obvious that you are missing his point. n/t
Posted by Alston on Wed 31-Dec-69 07:00 PM
sdvad
|
41299, I disagree. I think you're missing my point.
Posted by Homard on Wed 31-Dec-69 07:00 PM
And I think I've explained it enough.
My stance is that shifters are popular enough without making them "cooler."
I understand completely what you're saying, but I think your idea will result in more shifters, which I would not like to see.
|
41306, Oh come now.
Posted by lasentia on Wed 31-Dec-69 07:00 PM
More shifters = more mages = more targets for villagers.
How is that a bad thing! :)
|
41307, Now that's reasoning I can get behind.
Posted by Homard on Wed 31-Dec-69 07:00 PM
Bring on the Ewok and Wyvern forms, please.
|
41284, I would say the description could use work,
Posted by dude on Wed 31-Dec-69 07:00 PM
if that is the actual description. You try to pet it every time you look at it? That goes against the basic description advice.
|
41283, RE: Shifter Forms Rant
Posted by Daevryn on Wed 31-Dec-69 07:00 PM
What you see as a design flaw was something Cador did on purpose.
|
41286, RE: Shifter Forms Rant
Posted by The Heretic on Wed 31-Dec-69 07:00 PM
Shifters have changed a bit since then. How many forms existed back then? I suggest they change a bit more and are given a little more style. What was the original reason?
|
41289, RE: Shifter Forms Rant
Posted by Daevryn on Wed 31-Dec-69 07:00 PM
Speaking just for myself, the odds of me sinking that kind of time into the shifter class before 2020 when almost every other class in the game has seen attention less recently is zero.
Beyond that, I like the idea of the "normal forms are mostly real animals, quest forms are fantastical creatures." divide, although obviously I blurred it a bit with edge forms.
|
41295, I'd like to see vulns carry over into form for the following combinations...
Posted by Alston on Wed 31-Dec-69 07:00 PM
Gnome Air/offense.
|
41296, Forms have their own vulns and resists.
Posted by DurNominator on Wed 31-Dec-69 07:00 PM
Unshifted form is not the same as the animal form. For example, pachyderm is much larger than a gnome, yet it would be vulnerable to blunt due to it's small stature? Also, arial water shifter in form. A fish vulnerable to drowning attacks because it can't swim well due to it's wings? Doesn't make sense.
|
41298, Stack them. Shifters don't make sense...
Posted by Alston on Wed 31-Dec-69 07:00 PM
And I am tired of Gnome Air/off.
Stack I say.
|
41300, RE: Shifter Forms Rant
Posted by The Heretic on Wed 31-Dec-69 07:00 PM
In CF a cavefisher is a real animal. It's not fantastic like an unholy nightmare which should be a quest form. Normal in CF is not like normal in the real world. The edge forms are a great idea and I wouldn't play a shifter without one.
|