Guilds of Genesis

Only validated game players have access in this forum. Use this forum to discuss guilds. Note that as a general rule, guild abilities should not be revealed.
Forum rules
- Use common sense and be respectful towards each other at all times, even when disagreeing.
- Do not reveal sensitive game information. Guild secrets, player seconds are examples of things not allowed.
User avatar
Alisa
Rising Hero
Posts: 354
Joined: 16 Nov 2014 23:10

Re: Guilds of Genesis

Post by Alisa » 21 Jul 2018 16:55

Sometimes i wonder which guilds actually live up to your standards.

Since i could repeat so many of your arguments, against every other guild.

Funny how guilds are different, and have different ways.

Makfly
Champion
Posts: 596
Joined: 04 Mar 2010 00:36

Re: Guilds of Genesis

Post by Makfly » 21 Jul 2018 19:39

Greneth wrote:The application process is purely player driven, highly subjective when pointing out the fairness of it and should have absolutely nothing to do with the caid/drawbacks. Eventually other people will take over, age is a thing. And they don't have to keep that process, which then makes calling it a drawback absolutely worthless.
Funny how in the past, player-run and player-made rules are the exact reasons that the Wizards have pointed to, to justify the power/caid that MM had.
The rules (and issues with them) are the same today, but maybe the Wizards have changed their basis for their current caid of MM.

Personally I don't think anything in the hands of players should count towards or against any tax or caid at all, because as you and others have mentioned, it can and will be abused. Just as it has in all guilds in the game, not just EW.
Mortimor Makfly - Gnomish Xeno-Anthropologist

Greneth
Great Adventurer
Posts: 168
Joined: 30 Aug 2017 19:55

Re: Guilds of Genesis

Post by Greneth » 21 Jul 2018 21:13

Makfly wrote:
Greneth wrote:The application process is purely player driven, highly subjective when pointing out the fairness of it and should have absolutely nothing to do with the caid/drawbacks. Eventually other people will take over, age is a thing. And they don't have to keep that process, which then makes calling it a drawback absolutely worthless.
Funny how in the past, player-run and player-made rules are the exact reasons that the Wizards have pointed to, to justify the power/caid that MM had.
The rules (and issues with them) are the same today, but maybe the Wizards have changed their basis for their current caid of MM.

Personally I don't think anything in the hands of players should count towards or against any tax or caid at all, because as you and others have mentioned, it can and will be abused. Just as it has in all guilds in the game, not just EW.
Agreed, I pointed that our years and years ago when one of the admin said that they deserved the power they got due to their excellent RP as I'm watching them kick a friend from the guild due to my screw up and skype messages to the tattle tale Ilrahil about making a list of identified items.

If we all left tomorrow and new people took over there is absolutely nothing that says they would keep roleplay going. To use that as caid reasoning is one silly in my mind and two highly subjective because one person may say that so and so is a good roleplayer. While another may have seen them in Sparkle talking with newbies about the Rhianna concert they are going to. If a certain player does something who gets to be the judge on whether or not it's good rp or not?

Stick to data, numbers and black and white when it comes to balance. Leave the subjective, emotions and ANYTHING player ran out of it. This game is not roleplay enforced and people need to remember that.

You want to reward players for good RP? Create a story driven event and take over an NPC and award via participation.

User avatar
Arman
Wizard
Posts: 522
Joined: 22 Sep 2014 13:15

Re: Guilds of Genesis

Post by Arman » 22 Jul 2018 01:04

Greneth wrote: I would also argue as I am looking at the Herald spell list that the usefulness when comparing spells needs to be taken into account. If Guild A has spells that are HIGHLY useful to direct combat such as a spell that allows you to wear more armours, dodge better and consume less stamina coupled with a shield that has varying properties one of which being an amazing dodge put together with a spell that significantly raises ALL your physical stats or if you are big enough a very cheap and nice haste spell. And Guild B has things like... renew the herbs in the room, tell if someone is evil or not.
How it works is magic guilds are taxed on their spells. They are also taxed on the combat aid their spells offer. Allowable combat aid at any one point in time is capped.

So a spell like tells, detect alignment, water breathing, teleport, or invisibility will have a tax cost. They do not provide a direct combat benefit so don't have a combat aid tax or count towards the combat aid cap.

A spell like haste, fireball, or defensive shield are taxed as spells, and taxed on their combat aid.

As no layman magic guild can have more combat aid than another layman magic guild at any point in time, those with more spells accessible that provide combat aid have those spells diluted in effectiveness. So in your example above, Guild A may have 5 maintained spells and a direct damage spell that provide direct combat aid, however those spell caids can't exceed the cap. So usually diluted usefulness combined. On the flip side, guild B's one or two spells that provide caid has its caid concentrated in effectiveness for those abilities.

Both Guild A and B have the same potential maximum caid which is unimpacted by the spells they have that do not provide direct combat aid benefit. Those non-combat spells only impact the guild tax, and having them is not detrimental to a magic guild's combat offering at all.

So no need to argue that spell usefulness needs to be taken into account. It already is.

Zugzug
Veteran
Posts: 233
Joined: 20 May 2017 15:25

Re: Guilds of Genesis

Post by Zugzug » 22 Jul 2018 01:08

Also, if someone looks at EW guild, please see this this typo among the many spelleffects that a person can have simultaneously:

Code: Select all

His aura is utterly silent.
His body is unnaturally stiff and rigid.
He has a translucent layer of water upon hisskin.
He looks positively wired, and is blinking rapidly.
His flesh is covered with tiny ice crystals.
His aura is of calm and stillness.
He is surrounded by light from a small intense flame.
His body is cast in a dark pall of gloom.
His countenance exhudes a mystical sense of well-being.
His skin has taken on an unusual texture.
Hisskin - is it "His skin" or "Hiss kin"? :D

User avatar
Arman
Wizard
Posts: 522
Joined: 22 Sep 2014 13:15

Re: Guilds of Genesis

Post by Arman » 22 Jul 2018 01:29

Greneth wrote: Funny how in the past, player-run and player-made rules are the exact reasons that the Wizards have pointed to, to justify the power/caid that MM had.

The rules (and issues with them) are the same today, but maybe the Wizards have changed their basis for their current caid of MM.

Personally I don't think anything in the hands of players should count towards or against any tax or caid at all, because as you and others have mentioned, it can and will be abused. Just as it has in all guilds in the game, not just EW.
Morgul Mages don't get any caid benefits justified by roleplaying. Hasn't been the case since the recode, but I know what you are talking about.

There are lots of guilds though that get caid benefits outside of the cap for thematic reasons, balanced out with drawbacks. All magic guilds, the Union, Calians, Army of Darkness, rangers (believe it or not). Necros definitely will.

Greneth
Great Adventurer
Posts: 168
Joined: 30 Aug 2017 19:55

Re: Guilds of Genesis

Post by Greneth » 22 Jul 2018 02:11

Arman wrote:
Greneth wrote: I would also argue as I am looking at the Herald spell list that the usefulness when comparing spells needs to be taken into account. If Guild A has spells that are HIGHLY useful to direct combat such as a spell that allows you to wear more armours, dodge better and consume less stamina coupled with a shield that has varying properties one of which being an amazing dodge put together with a spell that significantly raises ALL your physical stats or if you are big enough a very cheap and nice haste spell. And Guild B has things like... renew the herbs in the room, tell if someone is evil or not.
How it works is magic guilds are taxed on their spells. They are also taxed on the combat aid their spells offer. Allowable combat aid at any one point in time is capped.

So a spell like tells, detect alignment, water breathing, teleport, or invisibility will have a tax cost. They do not provide a direct combat benefit so don't have a combat aid tax or count towards the combat aid cap.

A spell like haste, fireball, or defensive shield are taxed as spells, and taxed on their combat aid.

As no layman magic guild can have more combat aid than another layman magic guild at any point in time, those with more spells accessible that provide combat aid have those spells diluted in effectiveness. So in your example above, Guild A may have 5 maintained spells and a direct damage spell that provide direct combat aid, however those spell caids can't exceed the cap. So usually diluted usefulness combined. On the flip side, guild B's one or two spells that provide caid has its caid concentrated in effectiveness for those abilities.

Both Guild A and B have the same potential maximum caid which is unimpacted by the spells they have that do not provide direct combat aid benefit. Those non-combat spells only impact the guild tax, and having them is not detrimental to a magic guild's combat offering at all.

So no need to argue that spell usefulness needs to be taken into account. It already is.
Understandable, its going to be one of those times we agree to disagree I can see because I value targeted versatility to be way more important. The system is based upon subjective matter, which is why no one will ever agree.

EW maybe have 5 spells that are set at 20. And Heralds may have 3 spells that are sitting at 30 with two spells at 5 power but in my mind it doesn't make a difference if those 3 spells are slightly stronger because the overall package and versatility provided goes way beyond that extra oomph. I had this exact same issue with the Original MMs too, my argument was that you cannot give one guild so much versatility. They had the best Nuke DPS, The best Stealth, The best Debuffs and before the shield Nerf above average tanking and this was before Imbues were introduced. Now with EC, SoHM and soon to be WoHS such a situation is pointless as they too get it. But at the time it was a real problem, watching Hero MMs solo Mithas.

Now EW has the same issue, you have a given number of spells that are ALL highly sought out by any fighter. And no other guild so far that I know of can match that versatility coupled with the ease of access and lack of drawbacks. It doesn't matter if the cap is set at 100, what matters is how you get to that 100. Your argument for Heralds getting one of the best haste spells I believe you said is that it comes with a drawback that actually effects the player.

And this is all fine and dandy, other than pointing it out not all guilds are going to be 100% balanced. That's just how it is. However, when real actual drawbacks start showing up in guilds I can't help but point out the severe lack of them in "Still" the absolute best magical layman in the game. With no comparison. If the argument is that the individual spell power is the reason for implementing a drawback then I believe that targeted versatility seems to be missing from the equation.

User avatar
Arman
Wizard
Posts: 522
Joined: 22 Sep 2014 13:15

Re: Guilds of Genesis

Post by Arman » 22 Jul 2018 06:06

Greneth wrote:
Arman wrote:
Greneth wrote: I would also argue as I am looking at the Herald spell list that the usefulness when comparing spells needs to be taken into account. If Guild A has spells that are HIGHLY useful to direct combat such as a spell that allows you to wear more armours, dodge better and consume less stamina coupled with a shield that has varying properties one of which being an amazing dodge put together with a spell that significantly raises ALL your physical stats or if you are big enough a very cheap and nice haste spell. And Guild B has things like... renew the herbs in the room, tell if someone is evil or not.
How it works is magic guilds are taxed on their spells. They are also taxed on the combat aid their spells offer. Allowable combat aid at any one point in time is capped.

So a spell like tells, detect alignment, water breathing, teleport, or invisibility will have a tax cost. They do not provide a direct combat benefit so don't have a combat aid tax or count towards the combat aid cap.

A spell like haste, fireball, or defensive shield are taxed as spells, and taxed on their combat aid.

As no layman magic guild can have more combat aid than another layman magic guild at any point in time, those with more spells accessible that provide combat aid have those spells diluted in effectiveness. So in your example above, Guild A may have 5 maintained spells and a direct damage spell that provide direct combat aid, however those spell caids can't exceed the cap. So usually diluted usefulness combined. On the flip side, guild B's one or two spells that provide caid has its caid concentrated in effectiveness for those abilities.

Both Guild A and B have the same potential maximum caid which is unimpacted by the spells they have that do not provide direct combat aid benefit. Those non-combat spells only impact the guild tax, and having them is not detrimental to a magic guild's combat offering at all.

So no need to argue that spell usefulness needs to be taken into account. It already is.
Understandable, its going to be one of those times we agree to disagree I can see because I value targeted versatility to be way more important. The system is based upon subjective matter, which is why no one will ever agree.
I was actually more agreeing with your original statement rather than disagreeing... that the usefulness of spells need to be taken into account. No argument here. But the system is less about it being subjective measures and more about the benefit of certain spells being situational. A strength buff is pretty useless to a spellcaster, while a wisdom buff is pretty useless to a fighter class. But not in the reverse situation. Both buffs provide combat aid in the right situation... and the way aid is calculated is based on it being used in the most effective scenario. Then there are some abilities which are universally useful like heal. Unless you are undead, where it is detrimental. Again, situational.
Greneth wrote: EW maybe have 5 spells that are set at 20. And Heralds may have 3 spells that are sitting at 30 with two spells at 5 power but in my mind it doesn't make a difference if those 3 spells are slightly stronger because the overall package and versatility provided goes way beyond that extra oomph. I had this exact same issue with the Original MMs too, my argument was that you cannot give one guild so much versatility. They had the best Nuke DPS, The best Stealth, The best Debuffs and before the shield Nerf above average tanking and this was before Imbues were introduced. Now with EC, SoHM and soon to be WoHS such a situation is pointless as they too get it. But at the time it was a real problem, watching Hero MMs solo Mithas.
The old MMs didn't use the current standardised magic system or caid caps. If anything, the scenario you outline was the catalyst for the standardised magic system being created. Being a fantasy game, magic guilds can't just have one or even a handful spell... stereotypically and thematically, versatility has to be built in. But yes it is a hard one to balance... which is why there have been so few magic guilds compared to melee guilds in the game until the system was standardised. The system isn't perfect and will get tweaked over time... but that is just part of a natural evolution of a system as it gets more sophisticated.
Greneth wrote: Now EW has the same issue, you have a given number of spells that are ALL highly sought out by any fighter. And no other guild so far that I know of can match that versatility coupled with the ease of access and lack of drawbacks. It doesn't matter if the cap is set at 100, what matters is how you get to that 100. Your argument for Heralds getting one of the best haste spells I believe you said is that it comes with a drawback that actually effects the player.
In fairness, EWs were the first layman guild introduced using the standardised system. Warlocks provide a similar level of spell parity now. It may be that down the track we decide that the drawbacks for those guilds need to be tightened, and maybe it will be in versatility... that certain highly sought spells can only be gained through one of the specific deities/eldritch powers rather than provided to all... but that isn't on the cards now. I'd rather see how things play out with the new layman spellcaster dynamics before going down that path.
Greneth wrote: And this is all fine and dandy, other than pointing it out not all guilds are going to be 100% balanced.
You mean not going to be 100% equal, or equally balanced at the micro guild level. I look at balance from a more macro level. Guilds being within logical boundaries... not necessarily being equal in all things. Rock/paper/scissors kind of thing. And all that is pretty fluid as the game develops, new dynamics are introduced, along with new meta figured out by mortals.
Greneth wrote: That's just how it is. However, when real actual drawbacks start showing up in guilds I can't help but point out the severe lack of them in "Still" the absolute best magical layman in the game. With no comparison. If the argument is that the individual spell power is the reason for implementing a drawback then I believe that targeted versatility seems to be missing from the equation.
The argument is that the standard caid provided to layman guilds doesn't allow spellcasters to have any effective versatility. To provide that versatility and spellcaster experience, they get bonus caid which has to be countered by drawbacks. So the goal is versatility, at the cost of drawbacks.

Regarding EW drawbacks - I think I said previously that drawbacks when a guild is introduced may be diminished/nullified as the game evolves around it. Herbs were once rare. Gems were once rare. Getting bulk numbers of these items to consume in spells was a real drawback. That isn't the case as much now, but it doesn't change the need under the principles of magic guilds for there to be real drawbacks. If the Heralds manage to figure out a workaround for corruption or levelling, or Warlock components start being dropped by npcs in grinders, likewise that drawback would need to be reviewed. So the drawbacks will get reviewed for the EWs. I have been sent some information about how the guild component system currently works, but it needs to be unpacked more... and of my work program it isn't high on my full agenda.

Draugor
Myth
Posts: 1780
Joined: 06 Mar 2012 00:14

Re: Guilds of Genesis

Post by Draugor » 23 Jul 2018 14:39

@Arman

A good limit might be that the farther they come from Calia the more their powers wane, kinda like old PoT :) EC should ofc have it aswell :twisted:

Greneth
Great Adventurer
Posts: 168
Joined: 30 Aug 2017 19:55

Re: Guilds of Genesis

Post by Greneth » 24 Jul 2018 15:27

Arman wrote:Message
Appreciate you breaking it down!

Post Reply
http://tworzymyatmosfere.pl/przescieradla-jedwabne-z-gumka/