A long, long time ago I rolled up a shaman that was anti-magic. Recently, I considered retooling that character concept and rolling it again, but the idea of an uncaballed shaman without the use of fly potions turned into thoughts about regearing so I reconsidered and rolled something else. It got me to thinking though, what if the Battle cabal underwent a major overhaul and started allowing in priests and allowing them to keep their communes? Surely, it would take a major reworking of the cabal and its powers, but could conceivably bring the cabal up to speed with the evolution of the mud.

Of course, to be on board with this idea you have to believe that the Battle cabal is broken in some way or at the very least be open to the idea of the cabal changing its worldview somewhat. I'm most often on the anti-rager side of the coin and can say that, for the most part, battleragers cause me little grief. If I want to kill one I know exactly where to look and if my range is full of them I know exactly where to go. That said, I think the concept of the Battle cabal has lost some of its luster mainly because of the change in cabals (ie there being no dedicated mage cabal). When you log on as an Imperial priest and the first thing that happens is a battlerager raids you while there's a range full of magi you know something's not quite right.

So, my idea...

Essentially, the cabal is split into three portions:

Group 1: Savage Berserkers

This group is open to all those who might currently become battleragers. They enjoy many of the same powers as current Berserkers, but the strength of those powers is reduced somewhat. With this reduction in strength, Savage Berserkers are free to gank at will and, in fact, are encouraged to do so since they are fueled by their hatred for magic. In war, these are the first individuals in and they are expected to leave a swath of destruction and mangled corpses. They are entirely disinterested in tactics or the art of war. They are simply looking for things to sink their axe into.

Powers
Spellbane
Truesight
Deathblow
Bloodthirst (old school, without the battle fatigue)
Trophy
Resistance


Group 2: Champions of Combat

This group is also open to all those who might currently become battleragers. These are the so-called "greatest warriors of Thera." They are above the savagery of the Savage Berserkers, relying moreso on a higher understanding of tactics and the art of war. Through intense dedication to improvement of combat technique they have honed their skills to an unprecedented level. They are not fueled by a hatred for magic, but rather for the strict belief in self-reliance, pride, and courage. As such, they strive towards maintaining parity in combat, considering their personal integrity and honor above all else. This group enjoys powers much different than the Savage Berserkers. I can see this group getting a form of Imperial Training (and maybe the Blade Sect getting a different power instead). They might also get an improved (perhaps automatic) critical hit, a sort of minor-fly that would protect them against tripping, lashing, legsweeping, etc. (based upon their dexterity and dodging capabilities), and Fortress of Courage. Fortress of Courage would entail exponential improvements in combat prowess based upon the number of opponents. Basically the Champion of Combat would be adept at using the chaos of combat, the terrain, etc. to hinder his opponents. Maybe he dodges at just the right moment causing the weapons of his foes to become entangled (possibly disarming one or more of them), or ducks behind an opponent at just the right moment leading opponentA to strike at opponentB, etc.

Powers
Enhanced spell evasion
Minor-fly power
Enhanced critical hit
Truesight
Imperial training-like power
Fortress of Courage
Truesight

Group 3: Zealots of War

This group is open to the priest classes. The formation of this group would be made so much cooler if there was a god that was angered by the "theft" of magic from the gods. Anyways, the Zealots of War consist of those priests who have as their goal returning magic to its rightful owners (the gods). They are indifferent as to parity in combat and are free to join the Savage Berserkers in ganking folk down if they so choose. The caveat, however, is that communing on non-Zealots is not allowed. Obviously, Zealots of War enjoy different powers than either of the two groups above.

1) Fortification of Faith - This power allows Zealots of War to absorb some of the strength of the spells aimed at them. The amount absorbed varies on a number of variables. Once they are satisfied with the amount they have absorbed they can unleash it back at the mage in the form of a mental knife and they can do this at any time, even if the mage escapes to a new area (effectiveness decreases the further away the mage is)

2) Spiritual Siphon - A mana-only energy drain that has a SLIGHT chance at completely cutting an individual off from their mana source if it's used to open combat. If it's used to open combat Spiritual Siphon cannot be used again for several ticks.

3) Righteous Assault - Zealots of War get additional strikes with their weapons that non-Zealot priests would not due to their close companionship with true warriors. Think of it like having 33 - 50% in third attack.

Other powers too, but I'm out of ideas. Obviously somebody would have to work hard at balancing this monstrosity.

Wilhath, while I disagree with 75% of what you wrote, you should get credit for coming up with something interesting, albeit, in my opinion, mainly unworkable. I look at mort posts all the time, and if I disagree with 99%, sometimes there's still 1% which gets me thinking about something, and other imms are the same way. This is how change happens.

Instead of being criticized for something that is not to the liking of many, I'd just like to say I appreciate the effort, and anything that gets the imms, and playerbase thinking, usually has a positive effect.

To those who completely disagree with what he wrote, fine. It happens in imm quarters as well... we throw around unworkable ideas all the time, but sometimes something very good will come out of it. Criticizing the idea is fine, but coming down on the poster just for expressing an idea is ridiculous. I for one, appreciate these kind of posts.

Khas

I knew it'd stir up flames. People are very passionate about Battle. I don't let the poo storm bother me, but I appreciate your kind words.

I'll chime in my support here. In general, my opinion's that Wilhath's on crack for this one, but it appeared he put some thought into this, and I don't think they'd nessecarily be entirely UNreasonable, but are very drastic which by nature brings up the possibility of more and more problems. Since I didn't really feel I had a lot to constructively discuss, I'd not posted on this, but I would like to back Khasotholas' comments and spirit.

This would basically make it so that the kind of berserkers we have now would actually get an improvement to bloodlust, while losing any notion of fighting solo (at least, any notion enforced by cabal ideals). At the same time we'd have shamans running around with those berserkers, summoning people into gangs of unheard-of magnitude. And let's not forget the third type, the champions, who are supposed to be able to tank like psychos, which I could see standing in front of the berserkers and the shaman, making the possiblity of victory, and escape, virtually nil.


If this ever happens I'd quit the game and curse its name.

People have been whining about Deathblow for the last 10 years. If deathblow was so super overpowered then why doesn't battle just completely dominate the cabal wars? I'll tell you why, because it's not that overpowered when you fight cabals with healers, invokers, mages you can use A/S/B, etc. If ragers lost DB the slaughter would be even worse. Ragers get ganged more then anyone in the game, if you took out DB you really think they'd stop being ganged? NO. So stop crying, leave the last decent cabal power in, and take it like a man.

That which does not kill us,
makes us stronger.

Well, that's only half in jest, but imagine if deathblow did 10x-20x damage when being ganged by more than 4? Ragers wouldn't get whooped on so bad after that.

I am going to side with Dwoggurd and say it is pretty bad idea.

Incremental resist - I personally like it but I dont see any real purpose of doing this change.

Deathblow - Abernyte and many many other players (including me) think it have to go.
It served it's purpose nuking 2k hp Masters. Now it is incredibly unbalanced.

Some pointers:
1) Battles are all about destroying magi. But deathblow rarely changes the outcome of the fight between villager and mage.
2) It grants tremendous advantage against warrior_type classes who dont have dam_reduction options build into class (aka sanc).
3) Deathblow costs nothing. (Being villager has its drawbacks. But deathblow skill itself does not.)
4) Deathblow begs to be abused. Unscrupulous villager could easily repeately kill everybody in his pk (typically in middle ranks).
5) It forces enemies of Battle to resort to ganging.
6) Substitutes player skill for RND.

These arguments could go on and on.
But here is my proposal:
A) Replace current deathblow with manual_input owaza_type skill.
B) Dump the 'no-ganging' rule for berserkers. It never really worked and is constant point of complaints.

Reason for this - Every other cabal gangs. Some are even encouraged to this type of behavior. Berserkers are not supposed to... in exchange they are given DEATHBLOW.

Screw this. How about Ragers play by the same rules as everybody else?

My $0.02,

-=NNNick=-

>Screw this. How about Ragers play by the same rules as
>everybody else?

Is a game where everyone is the same more or less interesting? I think less.

Hey Neppy, I love you... but dont put words in my mouth.

Does the fact we both abide the US Law make us mirror twins?

I understand your point though.
But I think Battle cabal is quite distinguished already.
Giving them win ticket (DB) as an answer for any bad situation they might get to... seems unfair to me.

If you really think deathblow is a win ticket to win any or even most situations, you aren't playing the same cf the rest of us are.

>Hey Neppy, I love you... but dont put words in my mouth.
>
>Does the fact we both abide the US Law make us mirror twins?
>
>I understand your point though.
>But I think Battle cabal is quite distinguished already.
>Giving them win ticket (DB) as an answer for any bad situation
>they might get to... seems unfair to me.


If you have a problem with putting words in peoples mouths then i wonder why you say abernyte is for scrapping deathblow. I didn't think i'd seen him post that here.

>If you have a problem with putting words in peoples mouths
>then i wonder why you say abernyte is for scrapping deathblow.
>I didn't think i'd seen him post that here.

My mistake, sorry.
It was Jinroh (http://www.qhcf.net/cforum/logs/vpost.pl?53324)



<I wrote> Unscrupulous villager could easily repeately kill everybody in his pk.
<I wrote> Dump the 'no-ganging' rule for berserkers. It never really worked and is constant point of complaints.

By the way - Here is the type of 'bad' behavior I was talking about:
http://www.qhcf.net/cforum/logs/vpost.pl?53576

How about this, and yes I'm crazy - everyone wants a full cabal change but how about a little change?

-Make resist based on level (good suggestion I heard elsewhere)

-Make deathblow based on # of opponents and protection (same, heard elsewhere)

-Make deathblow have the chance to know someone out of the room (if I got hit with an UNSPEAKABLE mace blow, I'm assuming it's on the chin and throwing me across the room)

-Give villagers the ability to NOT kill someone (aka, knock um down to 0hp) because as the best warriors of Thera, they should have the ability to also limit their strength. This would allow villagers to train and not kill each other, and to not kill opponents who they don't want to necessarily kill (they've killed um 4 times already) or for roleplaying purposes (make um listen to your rants). Ya killing is all nice, but I think giving them the ability to NOT kill would be useful in many aspects (and people like not dying).

-Have spell evasion effect some bard songs (like fire and ice, since it's not necessarily sound) - it would still effect spellbane.

-Give defenders some type of meditation - as I've watched a friend play a giant defender, it was near worthless with his regen and makes the defender unwanted by a big majority of warrior-isk races.

-Force berserkers to have auto-assist off when grouped with other villagers - this is a horrible idea, but I can't think of any other way for the ganging to stop when they get attacked. With auto-assist off, all you'd have to do is blind them and then hit them....well, anyways, there should be something to limit villagers telling each other to flee while they massacre someone like this - http://www.qhcf.net/cforum/logs/vpost.pl?53357

I like villagers, just make it a bit more sane for same classes to fight villagers - it's not always an option to gang a villager, especially if honorbound or something to that effect. A class I once considered was a maran transmuter, then I realized how horrible it'd be against villagers - and getting wands as a trannie isn't exactly an easy option. Yes, there are ways to dirty fight (wait in duo), but what if they wanted to be sphere honor? Anyways, enough ranting - I like the cabal just wish some things were stronger in some areas and weaker in others.

NewTrapper

Considering how much I didn't like your last post (forget what about), I really like this one.

The 0 hp thing, I think could be useful as -some- ragers might want to incapacitate warrior foes and kill magi foes.

>The 0 hp thing, I think could be useful as -some- ragers might
>want to incapacitate warrior foes and kill magi foes.

This has been shot down a billion times, I don't see why ragers would be any different. The argument has never been about realism, it's been about balance and gameplay.

He explains why ragers would be different. They can do things that other warriors cannot because they are the best warrior in Thera.

I like keeping Battle close to the way it is now. It's the oldest cabal in all of Thera, it's been around since day one of the First Age, and no other cabal currently in has been around since even the end of the Second Age. Changes and tweaks within the scheme of things are good, but I think the big picture of Battle should stay traditional.

Aarn

Dear Immortals:

Here is what I propose.

1. Deathblow only working on mages, and give mages a cabal.

This is pretty big. Ragers should have a bad matchup right now save for the aforementioned shamans, but Masters weren't nearly as bad a matchup for Battle when:

They didn't have Empire backing them up
Clerics and paladins became communers and no longer Masters (HUGE)

Or, have deathblow work, but at a maximum of x3, and not as consistently. Rager Berserker Warriors (RBW's for the rest of this) are very powerful as is and the amount of damage one can truck out, even through preps, is mind-numbing.

Every mage has a horrible matchup against the Tuggluk-style dwarf rager warrior if played properly. Pincer, pincer, might as well pack up your things and try and word, if you're lucky enough to. This is why the return of something resembling Master to fight the Battleragers is very necessary.

2. Availability of preps to combat 'Ragers.

Arguably, this has been the case since day one. Why deathblow is still in the game in its current form, I don't understand. Battle is the lazy man's response to gathering preps (which do take quite a bit of work if you're doing it solo and with the wrong class). Make preps considerably less rare and hard to find, perhaps even sold at stores at a high price (10,000+). I know of one prep like that, I'm sure there's more.

3. Regular bash protection should stop warrior skills sometimes.

aka cranial, pincer, crushing blow. If you can lag a mage, then you win as a Battlerager. Most mages can't stop the pincer lag.

Lastly, if you see anything doing too good with the minimum of effort required, tone it down (aka pincer) Do not wait and watch other people complain and complain, try looking at it in your Super Duper Immortal Labs. Do not flame or deny the poster, since this has happened so much in the past I cannot count the times.

Best regards.

>Lastly, if you see anything doing too good with the minimum of
>effort required, tone it down (aka pincer)

This happens. It's just not always advertised.

>Do not wait and
>watch other people complain and complain, try looking at it in
>your Super Duper Immortal Labs.

Player complaints have little if any effect on the balance changes I make, so I wouldn't be waiting for them.

>Do not flame or deny the
>poster, since this has happened so much in the past I cannot
>count the times.

You're right, it's easier to just ignore the post and not respond if I don't agree with what it has to say or if I don't like the tone.

This post would be a prime candidate for that if I took my own advice.

Lastly, if you see anything doing too good with the minimum of effort required, tone it down (aka pincer) Do not wait and watch other people complain and complain, try looking at it in your Super Duper Immortal Labs.

What do you think we do? Say to ourselves "Wow. Ability X is really broken. I'll just leave it that way until someone complains loudly though."

Do not flame or deny the poster, since this has happened so much in the past I cannot count the times.

I'm sorry, but the credibility of the poster does matter to me. If an experienced player who is familiar to me writes "I've played around with Class X, and I've found them to be too weak.", I can say to myself "This person has done very well with Classes A, B, and C. If they can't succeed with Class X, it's something specific about it." I give that post more weight in my mind than someone I've never heard of, or someone who I know has had trouble playing every class.

Put another way, if I'm having a health problem, I'm going to take the word of two doctors over ten friends. Truth isn't subject to a vote. Sometimes, the majority of people are just plain wrong.

valguarnera@carrionfields.com

"Every mage has a horrible matchup against the Tuggluk-style dwarf rager warrior if played properly."

But every Tuggluk-style dwarf rager warrior gets stuck in quicksand because they can't fly, can't recall or teleport out of bad situations before they happen, can be summoned into a locked room, etc. There are always weaknesses to the Well-Played Character of the Month (tm). Deathblow is overpowered, preps are too plentiful, centurions are overpowered, bash is overpowered. When everything is overpowered, generally that means the game is a well-balanced version of rock, paper, scissors, but on crack, where each possible combination is strong and weak against various other possible combinations.

My point is that when you're on the receiving end of a particularly good character, especially when played by a particularly good player, it's easy to jump to the conclusion that the situation is imbalanced. And if some class/cabal/race combos work better against a particular class, you can just about guarantee that there's another class that will tear said "good combo" a new one. The key is to avoid fighting the classes you're weak against and hunt down the ones you're strong against.

As for deathblow being too strong, that argument has been around forever. The counter is that ragers have it tough: no preps, no flying, no magic, no nothing. I don't know that you're going to get deathblow dropped any in power...my ragers had more kills, but more deaths, per played hour than any other class/cabal I have played. More deadly, yes, but more dead too.

Anyway, I know it's frustrating to get killed by seemingly one-trick ponies. But if it works, and you keep falling to it, why should they change? Personally, I dislike wrath-spamming paladins, but if that's the quickest way to get as much damage out in as little time as possible, it's legit. Same with bashing giants. Same with pincering axe specs, cranialing mace specs, hurling dagger specs, impaling spear specs, sleeping necros, rotting shamans, assassinating assasins, binding binder thiefs, flyto/murder air shifters, entwining whip specs, deathblowing rager berserkers, etc etc. Everyone's got a niche, some special ability that defines their class and makes it powerful. But every character has a weakness, too.

Are you serious?

Clerics are powerful, if they don't lose their powers upon induction in Battle the game balance is dead.

Just imagine a funny group of ragers summoning, dispeling and bashing poor mages.
And if you leave them any window to gang to people, they will gang.

Another thing.
Ragers don't need additional powers do deal with mages. Spellbane is good enough to give mages headache.
Ragers don't die to mages as often as they die to communers, sanced warriors, bards and other classes ( sometimes boosted up by mages )

>Another thing.
>Ragers don't need additional powers do deal with mages.
>Spellbane is good enough to give mages headache.
>Ragers don't die to mages as often as they die to communers,
>sanced warriors, bards and other classes ( sometimes boosted
>up by mages )

I'd like to agree with that final point.

Although I like the idea of subtle changes in general, I'm not thrilled with a good portion of what you propose. I'll tell you why.

- Group 1: Savage Berserkers

This group is open to all those who might currently become battleragers. They enjoy many of the same powers as current Berserkers, but the strength of those powers is reduced somewhat. With this reduction in strength, Savage Berserkers are free to gank at will and, in fact, are encouraged to do so since they are fueled by their hatred for magic. In war, these are the first individuals in and they are expected to leave a swath of destruction and mangled corpses. They are entirely disinterested in tactics or the art of war. They are simply looking for things to sink their axe into.

Powers
Spellbane
Truesight
Deathblow
Bloodthirst (old school, without the battle fatigue)
Trophy
Resistance

First you say reduced powers, yet you indicate you want Bloodthirst without the battle fatigue. Battle fatigue is the largest drawback to one of the most deadly cabal powers in the game. I'm not in favor of anything that encourages ragers to gang like crazy, either.

- Group 2: Champions of Combat

This group is also open to all those who might currently become battleragers. These are the so-called "greatest warriors of Thera." They are above the savagery of the Savage Berserkers, relying moreso on a higher understanding of tactics and the art of war. Through intense dedication to improvement of combat technique they have honed their skills to an unprecedented level. They are not fueled by a hatred for magic, but rather for the strict belief in self-reliance, pride, and courage. As such, they strive towards maintaining parity in combat, considering their personal integrity and honor above all else. This group enjoys powers much different than the Savage Berserkers. I can see this group getting a form of Imperial Training (and maybe the Blade Sect getting a different power instead). They might also get an improved (perhaps automatic) critical hit, a sort of minor-fly that would protect them against tripping, lashing, legsweeping, etc. (based upon their dexterity and dodging capabilities), and Fortress of Courage. Fortress of Courage would entail exponential improvements in combat prowess based upon the number of opponents. Basically the Champion of Combat would be adept at using the chaos of combat, the terrain, etc. to hinder his opponents. Maybe he dodges at just the right moment causing the weapons of his foes to become entangled (possibly disarming one or more of them), or ducks behind an opponent at just the right moment leading opponentA to strike at opponentB, etc.

Powers
Enhanced spell evasion
Minor-fly power
Enhanced critical hit
Truesight
Imperial training-like power
Fortress of Courage
Truesight

Enhanced spell evasion and critical hit? Do you have any idea how powerful those powers really are in the right hands? I'm not in favor of moving Imperial training. It's an Imperial power.

- Group 3: Zealots of War

This group is open to the priest classes. The formation of this group would be made so much cooler if there was a god that was angered by the "theft" of magic from the gods. Anyways, the Zealots of War consist of those priests who have as their goal returning magic to its rightful owners (the gods). They are indifferent as to parity in combat and are free to join the Savage Berserkers in ganking folk down if they so choose. The caveat, however, is that communing on non-Zealots is not allowed. Obviously, Zealots of War enjoy different powers than either of the two groups above.

1) Fortification of Faith - This power allows Zealots of War to absorb some of the strength of the spells aimed at them. The amount absorbed varies on a number of variables. Once they are satisfied with the amount they have absorbed they can unleash it back at the mage in the form of a mental knife and they can do this at any time, even if the mage escapes to a new area (effectiveness decreases the further away the mage is)

2) Spiritual Siphon - A mana-only energy drain that has a SLIGHT chance at completely cutting an individual off from their mana source if it's used to open combat. If it's used to open combat Spiritual Siphon cannot be used again for several ticks.

3) Righteous Assault - Zealots of War get additional strikes with their weapons that non-Zealot priests would not due to their close companionship with true warriors. Think of it like having 33 - 50% in third attack.


Clerical classes in Battle are possible. They've been done before. I once spent a few weeks creating numerous powers and skills for clerics in Battle. At some point, I might revisit them.

Right now I think the Scout/Defender/Berserker trio works well, but, quite frankly, in general they aren't played as Scouts, Defenders and Berserkers. 95% of villagers fight and play the exact same way, regardless of what portion of the village they were inducted into. That's something for Battle leadership, both mortal, and immortal to deal with, however.

Khas

>
>Clerical classes in Battle are possible. They've been done
>before. I once spent a few weeks creating numerous powers and
>skills for clerics in Battle. At some point, I might revisit
>them.

This is a spectacular idea. Battle clerics should be extremely rare, and in my opinion, should lose their communes in general. How could you balance bloodthirst + summon/gate? How could you balance resist + protection/sanc? How could you balance any of the poison/plague/wrath/dispel/etc type spells with ragers? How could you balance healer's "kick" with deatblow, I ask!

The solution would be, as you say, to create a new set of 5 or 8 "Battle Cleric" powers to give to the rare priest inducted into Ragers. This is an oustanding idea, and a good way to degimpify the complete loss of communes. It would also be acceptable to the hardcore "don't commune on me" ragers because the Battle Cleric has been specifically approved by the Immortals, by definition.

The downside, of course, is that by continuing to eliminate all communes, you also remove useful communes that don't conflict with the rager lifestyle. Detect good/evil/invis. Heal. Bless. Many paladin virtues that enhance combat abilities rather than communing abilities. This, to me, is just tough luck that comes with the territory of playing a borderline impossible class/cabal combo.

The other downside is the influx of Battle Cleric wannabes, which kind of defeats the idea of having very rare clerics....but I digress. This was just an "attaboy" for your post, to let you know that there are people out there who appreciate work that complements out-of-the-box character types.

>This is a spectacular idea. Battle clerics should be
>extremely rare, and in my opinion, should lose their communes
>in general.

Disagree on both points. Of course having said that, i certainly don't expect them to get standard rager powers. I don't even expect them to get -any- cabal powers.

>
>Disagree on both points. Of course having said that, i
>certainly don't expect them to get standard rager powers. I
>don't even expect them to get -any- cabal powers.
>

Allowing ragers to commune was supposedly an extremely daunting coding task. I'm not sure if that's changed within the past few years, but I suspect no one has had reason to take it on. That's one. Two, and I think I hit on this in my post, even if they could commune from a coding standpoint, how do you limit who uses what communes? Some are arguably imbalanced when combined with rager powers. Does an immortal come in and make certain communes unusable for each individual? Seems reasonable to me, so I'll concede there. But if it can't be coded anyway, it's a moot point.

I still think Battle Clerics (if ever made "mainstream") should be rare, much as bards are/were generally quite rare. I'm not sure how it's been lately, but there were typically between zero and two active bards in ragers at any given time (1+ years ago). Rarely would both be on at the same time, and certain songs were either limited by immortals or their use outlawed altogether. Battle Cleric rarity may be self-correcting since a) empowerment classes are generally a limited population and b) cleric induction would likely be Imm-only, further reducing potential candidates. So we can agree to disagree there, but regardless, I think clerics would be naturally quite rare.

>Two, and I think I hit on this in my
>post, even if they could commune from a coding standpoint, how
>do you limit who uses what communes? Some are arguably
>imbalanced when combined with rager powers.

They don't get rager powers, i just said that. Shaman summoning have been used in conjunction with ragers before, but irrelevant, there are rules of parity.

>I still think Battle Clerics (if ever made "mainstream")
>should be rare, much as bards are/were generally quite rare.

Empowerment controls quality, also imms that empower magic haters are limiting. I see no particular reason why a supporter of the divine over the mortal powers, should be restricted in trying to limit the spread of mortal power.

As I understand it, you're saying the cleric would join the cabal and get nothing other than the benefit of the cabal channel? None of the powers at all?

In any event I think a druid in particular could be made to fit a battle cabal role very well, even without the old magic vs. nature (master vs. sylvan) philosophy.

>They don't get rager powers, i just said that. Shaman
>summoning have been used in conjunction with ragers before,
>but irrelevant, there are rules of parity.
>

I understand what you said, I was referring more toward communer powers combined with other members' rager powers. Summon is bad enough (rules of parity don't limit some people..). What about word of recall? Sanc and heals limited only by mana on the big D? It just seems like a lot of communer powers defeat the "hard life, rewarded with spellbane and deathblow" nature of the cabal. Just my observation, and I'm playing devil's advocate at this point so I'll bow out.

>Empowerment controls quality, also imms that empower magic
>haters are limiting. I see no particular reason why a
>supporter of the divine over the mortal powers, should be
>restricted in trying to limit the spread of mortal power.
>

Like I said, it's partly a hard-coded issue. If it weren't for that, I'd be on board because of the built-in weed-out steps that we've both mentioned.

Or have witnessed questionable actions, as I personally have sent notes, prayed, and done other things to get things done in game and not seen ANYTHING,
When I attempt to make someone RP the imm's bypass me, saying what a great guy so and so is cause he can PK, so poof he is inducted even if I think he's unworthy, lacking rp, depth, and even style.

So don't point fingers at leadership, we try as hard as we can.

*Unruffles his feathers*
Pfft, I'm actually with Wilhath something needs to be done. Even if he is Emperial scum =D

about the current crop of Battleragers. I don't have a problem with them, frankly, because their patterns are predictable and they're easy to avoid. I'd like to see them grow some nuts and not be so ganky, but whatever. If I want to kill a battlerager I look first at the Destructor and then fan out area by area knowing I'll never have to walk farther than Azuremain or Kiadana-Rah. If I want to avoid battleragers I just keep an eye on "where."

I posted because of a role idea. I'd like to play a Battlerager priest without being completely worthless. He says he's got #### in mind so I'm down with that. I'll probably never play the character, but knowing it's a possibility is pretty cool.

I'll just keep playing anti-ragers I figure, at least when I feel I can stomach the cabal situation again.

No other side is any better, there are exceptions but thats all they are flukes.
I think I'll settle myself with playing D&D, and writing after this last round of CF =P
I really enjoy CF, I do, but I don't enjoy the lack of action on sides
Everyone is so busy pointing fingers that no one seems to want to actually pick up a shovel and just move the shiit.
I hate how battle has Stagnated, I hate how Empire is about ganging/fulllooting, I hate how Maran is about being a sniveler and ganging. And Tribunal Heh what a laugh. I don't like most of the outlanders I've delt with, but I can't say I've been so impressed with anyone recently that I've been like "damn I wish I was on his side" Blitzenturt is the most recent, and I think it was just a nice combo, and good playing times.

Oh, and to the Imm's sorry about my previous post, I've been a bit angry at how I feel as though no one will do anything to solve any recent problems, not even a "An immortal tells you "Hey dude, we don't ####ing care, stop bothering us." Or "Eh, its not my problem, send a note or email or something, stop bothering me"
No matter how ridicilous the circumstance.

And as I stated previously I'd like to see some sort of Revamp, or atleast MORE Immortal attention, for battle.

>Oh, and to the Imm's sorry about my previous post, I've been a
>bit angry at how I feel as though no one will do anything to
>solve any recent problems

Like what?

In the case of Battle, at least, it's not that I wouldn't care if they were "broken." It's that I don't think that they are.

I really can't announce these things over the forums, but I'm sure if a few imms checked there notes and perhaps a few Pray logs, they might get a gooood Idea what I'm talking about =(
Should I just start sending notes/emails to the imp's if I feel as though a particularly critical thing is being ignored?

PS, this is about not so much a Mechanic issue, but a lack there of of RP adherance to battle rules, and finally OOC involvment...
I would appreciate a reply

The people most easily able to tear someone a new one (the zerkers) are effectively having the few restrictions on this power removed. I can see why you'd propose that, but I think the powers would need a major tone-down. I don't think being perma-lagged by zerkers is remotely balanced.

Also, I really don't like the idea of one faction of battle being able to cut people off from mana sources. That means magi are potentially going to be without magic, as if assassins with tiger claw and dagger specs with hurl weren't enough. Not only that, but now the priest classes aren't as much danger because you can (a) gang them as a zerker, or (b) cut them off from their mana.

>The people most easily able to tear someone a new one (the
>zerkers) are effectively having the few restrictions on this
>power removed. I can see why you'd propose that, but I think
>the powers would need a major tone-down. I don't think being
>perma-lagged by zerkers is remotely balanced.

I suggested they be toned down, but I'm not a master of game balance so I left how much they're toned down as an exercise for the imms. The one thing I forgot to mention specifically are the specific goals and resulting limitations of each group. See below.

>
>Also, I really don't like the idea of one faction of battle
>being able to cut people off from mana sources. That means
>magi are potentially going to be without magic, as if
>assassins with tiger claw and dagger specs with hurl weren't
>enough. Not only that, but now the priest classes aren't as
>much danger because you can (a) gang them as a zerker, or (b)
>cut them off from their mana.


Berserkers, motivated as they are by hatred for magic, are meant to strike at magic's source which is mage PCs/NPCs. Zealots, as well, are meant to strike at magic's source but for a slightly different reason. These two groups would be limited by the fact that their powers ONLY work against mages. No deathblowing against priests or warriors, no cutting priests off from the mana source, etc. Essentially, when fighting non-magi these two groups would be uncaballed except that they would have the defensive powers (resistance, truesight, whatever the Zealots get, etc.) To offset that limitation somewhat they're welcome to travel in gank squads. Champions of Combat, however, are motivated by a strict belief in self-reliance. While they are certainly welcome to fight mages, and have a power (spell evasion) specifically designed for that purpose, their main goal is to rid the world of magic-using fighter classes by proving that people can go without.

asdf

Oi! By the stains on my loincloth ye filth are makin' me whimper like en elven schoolgirl. The thought O' makin' Battle even more powerful is jest askin' fer en Ogre-sized arse-whippin.

The thought O' makin' them weaker has been en arguement all along, but inevitably it's about predictin' yer enemy en makin' decisions based on their past reactions te situations. Where's that filthy bastird Intronan, er that drunken taint-ticklin' filth Kastellyn in the dire days like this!! Holtzendorff!? BoltThrower!

Bah! Don't make me break away frem the Astral Forge te bugger ye filth up.

Do you still have a copy of all the clerical and other powers we came up with? I'm having trouble finding them. (Granted I haven't looked that hard yet, but I'm lazy). We had some really good stuff. Hope all is well with you, the missus and the lil guy.

Khas

If you have them, email them to me! Or else!

Oi! I've gottem. Old stories, all the lands I done managed te explore en show ye stinkin' Therans. All the skulls fer the skull throne I done managed. A few scalps. Stale ale...liches femur...Oi! Yer wee little thong loincloth fer that time at the Eterna...gah!

I'll gettem te ye. Hope yer managin' sleep. Bet that wee one's lookin' pretty like yer wife, en nae ugly like yer filthy mug! Mwah!

Be good ye bastard!