SFR, Inc. Forum Index SFR, Inc.
Forums that relate to SFR products
 
 Watched TopicsWatched Topics   FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Magic Discussion
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next
 
This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    SFR, Inc. Forum Index -> 3.01 and later Rules Discussion - Locked
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
DEEPBLUEB2
monster
Stockholder



Joined: 20 Nov 2005
Posts: 7885
Location: Des Plaines, IL

usa.gif
PostPosted: Mon Jan 02, 2012 11:21 am GMT    Post subject: Reply with quote

Doubling of magic: (monsters)

This really belongs in both threads...

so I'll cover the idea briefly.

And keep in mind...
no foundation has been poured,
so ideas like monsters don't count towards the magic health,
are still pending.

Quite simply...
if doubling of magic is limited to magicians,
then magicians like the Bear-folk,
which only has 1 magic,
might be more attractive,
as now you would have more health in-play that can double magic.
Back to top
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
stormywaters
rare



Joined: 22 May 2011
Posts: 1403

usa.gif
PostPosted: Mon Jan 02, 2012 2:38 pm GMT    Post subject: Reply with quote

Jim Rayborn wrote:
Quite simply...
if doubling of magic is limited to magicians,
then magicians like the Bear-folk,
which only has 1 magic,
might be more attractive,
as now you would have more health in-play that can double magic.


Why would I take a 4-point Bear with one magic face instead of 4 points of other mages who can double (in your system) and produce magic more reliably?

Again, remember that we don't want to keep the rule of 50% mages, so taking it "because it's only 1 point of magic user" isn't relevant here.
Back to top
 View user's profile Send private message
DEEPBLUEB2
monster
Stockholder



Joined: 20 Nov 2005
Posts: 7885
Location: Des Plaines, IL

usa.gif
PostPosted: Mon Jan 02, 2012 3:50 pm GMT    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Again, remember that we don't want to keep the rule of 50% mages, so taking it "because it's only 1 point of magic user" isn't relevant here.


well here is one of those foundation issues,
until the foundation is truly established,
we need to examine magic from every perspective.
If we simply conclude that the 50% rules is abolished,
we overlook this very point I am making...which is...monsters with magic become a new choice..as all it takes is to have 1 magic icon,
and the ID can double.
So if the 50% rule was still in effect,
choosing several bear folk will only cost 1 point each,
while allowing their ID to double...
I call it the fighting magicians.

it's possible all monsters will be considered null as far as the magic count goes...
then even better...
because mages can double Ids...
if that is even what is truly decided on.

So we can't knock all ideas down,
like I said...we need to put it all on the table before the foundation is poured.
Back to top
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
stormywaters
rare



Joined: 22 May 2011
Posts: 1403

usa.gif
PostPosted: Mon Jan 02, 2012 3:51 pm GMT    Post subject: Reply with quote

Jim Rayborn wrote:
Quote:
Again, remember that we don't want to keep the rule of 50% mages, so taking it "because it's only 1 point of magic user" isn't relevant here.


well here is one of those foundation issues,
until the foundation is truly established,
we need to examine magic from every perspective.
If we simply conclude that the 50% rules is abolished,
we overlook this very point I am making...which is...monsters with magic become a new choice..as all it takes is to have 1 magic icon,
and the ID can double.
So if the 50% rule was still in effect,
choosing several bear folk will only cost 1 point each,
while allowing their ID to double...
I call it the fighting magicians.


Right, but consider from the stance that the 50% rule is abolished. Then what do we do to make those monsters playable?
Back to top
 View user's profile Send private message
DEEPBLUEB2
monster
Stockholder



Joined: 20 Nov 2005
Posts: 7885
Location: Des Plaines, IL

usa.gif
PostPosted: Mon Jan 02, 2012 3:53 pm GMT    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Right, but consider from the stance that the 50% rule is abolished. Then what do we do to make those monsters playable?


I just covered that in tweaking monsters...
if abolished...
then mages double...
so choosing monsters mages is still a bonus...
double Ids by theory/
Back to top
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
karoath
dragonmount



Joined: 28 Aug 2005
Posts: 47

usa.gif
PostPosted: Wed Jan 25, 2012 8:39 am GMT    Post subject: Reply with quote

It looks like some threads are talking about the same issues. I posted the following content in http://www.sfr-inc.com/bb/viewtopic.php?t=3298, but I think it is relevant here.

I've always felt that the variety offered in Dragon Diceâ„¢™ is one of the best aspects of the game. There are lots of ways to play and lots of combos available. Part of this is reliant upon the varied spell lists and racial spells (this also makes the races more appealing). I would regret the loss if the spell list is reduced. In fact, I've often wished for more spells! Magic, however, does seem to be the core focus of too many games. People seem to dislike having too many options in a single battle as well.

Here are some ideas:
1) An army is only permitted to have 25% of their army composed of magic-using dice.

2) Don't double magic, but this would require changes to amazons and frostwings.

3) Magic can not be cast unless the color exists at the terrain (we'd need new rules for the reserves). Perhaps black can only cast if there are dead in his graveyard.

4) Use a concept that is common in modern deck-building games. Include a small set of cards (or tokens) with the game... or a randomized table. Each game includes 'x' number of spells that are available to all armies (maybe 10 as suggested by someone else) and each race has 'x available (maybe 1). These are determined randomly each game. This makes each game unique and reduces decisions in each game. It also makes a person re-think how he/she plays each game.

A combination of the above ideas also could have potential. Number 4 I feel would be the most useful adjustment as it would add variety to the game without removing flexibility. This could significantly speed up the game and would also allow room for expansions. The spell cards could be included in their relevant packages (race-specific spells in their own boxes).
Back to top
 View user's profile Send private message
Autpost
common
Stockholder



Joined: 18 Mar 2005
Posts: 471
Location: Vienna

latvia.gif
PostPosted: Thu Mar 01, 2012 8:08 am GMT    Post subject: Reply with quote

A few comments to magic:
The problem with magic is not so that it is too powerful. It is rather the fact that you can do the dirty work with magic alone. Spells should be more designed as a support for a second army.

Imagine this blue/air spell:
Until end of turn target army doubles its missile results.

Maybe overpowered, but if you play with mages only it is weak.
And if you turtle your missile units and mages into one big army it is a useless spell: Your mages may cast this spell on their own army, but since they already have taken their march to roll for magic they will not profit from doubling missiles/melee/maneuvers and even saves if the effect lasts until end of turn.

What if Wind Walk lasts only until end of your turn (instead of "until beginning of your next turn")? Again, it would be only a support for a second army and a useless spell for a turtle.

I don't want to say that "magic can do the dirty work alone" should be removed entirely, but it could be restricted to certain races (in form of racespecific spells; mainly to red and black).
_______________

Some spells last until beginning of your next turn, and some until end of your next turn. I always have to look up which spell lasts how long.
Can this be simplyfied?

For instance:
Version 1: All spells on any of your armies wear off at the beginning of your turn. (This includes your spells as well as spells cast by an opponent.)
If this is a general rule spells do not have to mention a duration in their description. How long will an enchantment last? If it is army targeting then until beginning of your next turn.
This version is something similar to untapping: At the beginning of your turn all evil spells are gone and your army is fresh to do whatever it want.

Version 2: All spells on any of your armies wear off at the end of your turn.
This is the more negative variant: A turtle can protect itself by enchanting itself only during this turn. So you'd better do something else.

A combination ot these 2 variants is also possible:
Version 3: All spells you have cast on any of your armies (during the last round) wear off at the beginning of your turn.
All spells an opponent has cast on any of your armies wear off at the end of your turn.
Terrain targeting spells last until the end of any turn, except those which last until the terrain face is changed.
Back to top
 View user's profile Send private message
DEEPBLUEB2
monster
Stockholder



Joined: 20 Nov 2005
Posts: 7885
Location: Des Plaines, IL

usa.gif
PostPosted: Thu Mar 01, 2012 9:18 am GMT    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
The problem with magic is not so that it is too powerful. It is rather the fact that you can do the dirty work with magic alone. Spells should be more designed as a support for a second army.


When I first started playing DD,
I played with minimal spells.

Dan and Ken,
who both won the worlds played with minimal spells because they both have mentioned that they were new to the game and did not really know the spells good enough to make use of them.

So the real issue with spells is the complexity that they can become when you do know them,
but not just the complexity,
but the blindsiding they can produce to those who have not seen them in use.
This blindsiding is what is typically called... too strong.
One reason I had posted tips and tricks was to inform players of these types of "tricks" so to help the game.
So if your army is not magic savy...
so what...
but I don't think watering down magic is the answer,
in fact in competition,
with a timer,
magic may be the Achilles heel if you don't get it going fast enough.

So bottom line,
I think those who say magic is too powerful,
should make stronger non magic armies to "counter".

Find ways to overcome the issues rather than write a way around them.
Back to top
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
eggsaladsandwich
uncommon



Joined: 31 Jan 2005
Posts: 519
Location: West Linn, OR.

usa.gif
PostPosted: Thu Mar 01, 2012 11:56 am GMT    Post subject: Reply with quote

Autpost wrote:
Version 3: All spells you have cast on any of your armies (during the last round) wear off at the beginning of your turn.
All spells an opponent has cast on any of your armies wear off at the end of your turn.
Terrain targeting spells last until the end of any turn, except those which last until the terrain face is changed.


This sounds like a great way to simplify "enchantments". I like it, i like it alot. Razz
_________________
"Another days useless energy spent." Moody Blues
Back to top
 View user's profile Send private message
Denimwizard
common



Joined: 01 Jan 2011
Posts: 356
Location: Maryland

usa.gif
PostPosted: Thu Mar 01, 2012 12:06 pm GMT    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
So bottom line,
I think those who say magic is too powerful,
should make stronger non magic armies to "counter".


One could liken that idea to bringing a knife to a gun fight.

Magic is powerful period in DD. It can cane keep the terrain at the same face, it can kill armies, deminish effects, and even summon mighty dragons.

So this is much more than what missles and melee can do. Obviously you dont want to nerf dragons in a game called Dragon Diceâ„¢. But we do need to take a look and may be tweak some things. [/quote]
Back to top
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
stormywaters
rare



Joined: 22 May 2011
Posts: 1403

usa.gif
PostPosted: Thu Mar 01, 2012 12:07 pm GMT    Post subject: Reply with quote

Jim Rayborn wrote:
Find ways to overcome the issues rather than write a way around them.


You keep saying this, but it doesn't make it true. Nobody is saying Wall of Fog is too good. Nobody is complaining about Stoneskin. Some spells are fine.

Lightning Strike is too good. You can't "build a stronger army" to stop Lightning Strike, unless you're building a save-heavy army; SS are the only race who can do that and still maintain a modicum of maneuverability.

Wilding is too good. It requires no setup or chance, the way Burning Hands does.

Path is too good. The only way to fight Path is through magic of your own. You have to Path before they do to steal the 8 before they can. Throw in TRrM and it's over.

Yes, magic is too good. A handful of spells ruin it for everyone.
Back to top
 View user's profile Send private message
DEEPBLUEB2
monster
Stockholder



Joined: 20 Nov 2005
Posts: 7885
Location: Des Plaines, IL

usa.gif
PostPosted: Thu Mar 01, 2012 1:51 pm GMT    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lightning Strike offers a chance to save...
and FOD cost more for a reason.

these two are balanced in accordance to their power.

I give Lightning strike about a 50% chance of working.
I don't think that's too powerful.
If anything...
lightning strike's threat is powerful,
but in execution,
just like in counting on a breath,
certain factors still need to unfurl.

I've heard all the complaints...
but then i sit down and play a game and say...
I don't think so...
take your lumps and find a solution.
(instead of writing your way..err how about...
the pen is mightier than the sword... Laughing )
If spells are your adversary...
fight fire with fire.... Razz

oh yeah...

END
Back to top
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
stormywaters
rare



Joined: 22 May 2011
Posts: 1403

usa.gif
PostPosted: Thu Mar 01, 2012 2:11 pm GMT    Post subject: Reply with quote

Jim Rayborn wrote:
I give Lightning strike about a 50% chance of working.


Then you're using it wrong. It should succeed 67+% of the time. I'm on my phone so I can't check the dice, but I'd bet a majority of rares and monsters save < 50% of the time.

Quote:
I don't think that's too powerful.
If anything...
lightning strike's threat is powerful,
but in execution,
just like in counting on a breath,
certain factors still need to unfurl.


Except breath requires more magic, is avoidable, and requires a 1 in 9 roll, not a 2 in 3 roll.

Quote:
END


Doing this every time you respond to a post doesn't mean your point "wins".
Back to top
 View user's profile Send private message
eggsaladsandwich
uncommon



Joined: 31 Jan 2005
Posts: 519
Location: West Linn, OR.

usa.gif
PostPosted: Thu Mar 01, 2012 5:46 pm GMT    Post subject: Reply with quote

There's nothing wrong with Lightning strike, just give all the other colrs equally deadly or scary spells and remove Doubling magic altogether (this will fix a multitude of stuff when it comes to magic).
_________________
"Another days useless energy spent." Moody Blues
Back to top
 View user's profile Send private message
stormywaters
rare



Joined: 22 May 2011
Posts: 1403

usa.gif
PostPosted: Thu Mar 01, 2012 5:49 pm GMT    Post subject: Reply with quote

eggsaladsandwich wrote:
There's nothing wrong with Lightning strike, just give all the other colrs equally deadly or scary spells and remove Doubling magic altogether (this will fix a multitude of stuff when it comes to magic).


Magic is already too good, hence the 50% restriction. I don't think increasing the power level, even after removing doubling, is a step in the right direction.
Back to top
 View user's profile Send private message
eggsaladsandwich
uncommon



Joined: 31 Jan 2005
Posts: 519
Location: West Linn, OR.

usa.gif
PostPosted: Thu Mar 01, 2012 7:50 pm GMT    Post subject: Reply with quote

stormywaters wrote:
eggsaladsandwich wrote:
There's nothing wrong with Lightning strike, just give all the other colrs equally deadly or scary spells and remove Doubling magic altogether (this will fix a multitude of stuff when it comes to magic).


Magic is already too good, hence the 50% restriction. I don't think increasing the power level, even after removing doubling, is a step in the right direction.


I think you will be amazed how much removing doubleing will nerf magic. And magic should be powerful in a fantasy based game, so its a good balancing change overall. Rolling Eyes As for the 50% restriction, remove doubling and you can remove that also. Yes , faceing an army of cantrip casting magicians will be scary, as it should be, but they have their weakenesses. I think all will balance out if we just at least start playtesting no doubling and no magic restrictions to see what kind of armies develope. Its a start anyway, and god knows we need a start to rules 3.0...lets get on with it!
_________________
"Another days useless energy spent." Moody Blues
Back to top
 View user's profile Send private message
stormywaters
rare



Joined: 22 May 2011
Posts: 1403

usa.gif
PostPosted: Fri Mar 02, 2012 2:26 pm GMT    Post subject: Reply with quote

eggsaladsandwich wrote:
stormywaters wrote:
eggsaladsandwich wrote:
There's nothing wrong with Lightning strike, just give all the other colrs equally deadly or scary spells and remove Doubling magic altogether (this will fix a multitude of stuff when it comes to magic).


Magic is already too good, hence the 50% restriction. I don't think increasing the power level, even after removing doubling, is a step in the right direction.


I think you will be amazed how much removing doubleing will nerf magic. And magic should be powerful in a fantasy based game, so its a good balancing change overall. Rolling Eyes As for the 50% restriction, remove doubling and you can remove that also. Yes , faceing an army of cantrip casting magicians will be scary, as it should be, but they have their weakenesses. I think all will balance out if we just at least start playtesting no doubling and no magic restrictions to see what kind of armies develope. Its a start anyway, and god knows we need a start to rules 3.0...lets get on with it!


I think that removing the restriction and doubling will help, but I am willing to bet that simply removing doubling won't do the trick to balance magic.

Then, of course, terrain colors need to have meaning, so we won't have addressed that aspect at all.
Back to top
 View user's profile Send private message
SpazzyP
dragonmount



Joined: 17 Feb 2012
Posts: 31
Location: Dickson TN

usa.gif
PostPosted: Sat Mar 03, 2012 10:28 pm GMT    Post subject: Reply with quote

I just sat down and started to read this topic, I did not read every post in detail so I"m sorry if i am restating what someone has already said.

1. If ID's were not doubled than Sunflares would rule the magic game. 18H worth of Sunflares roll on average around 15-16 points of magic WITHOUT doubling. But they have a chance of rolling much higher.

2. If you don't want ID's to double bring a Grove into the game. For instance while playing undead, place only one unit in the frontier the rest of your army at horde and home. As soon as your magic playing opponent gets a look at your armies he will most likely move his magicians to the frontier or reserves. There they will be out of harms way from your undead melee might, but ID's would not double.

Yes that strategy works only if you win the first roll, but what strategy usually doesn't.

Some of the guys I play with don't like magic either And we have played some No-Magic games. But at that point it doesn't feel like Dragon Diceâ„¢ anymore. At least not the game I love. Ya its fun, but its the same every time. You are going roll for melee or missile. And a maneuver here and there. At that point why not grab a big bag of d6's and see can roll the biggest number.

To me DD is about not knowing whats going to happen. It's about thinking your opponent will summon a dragon but instead buries your units you were going to resurrect next turn making you completely rethink your next move. Its about when you are about to capture you're second terrain, a white dragon is summoned on you. And the only thing you can hope for is that your 10H of Runners can survive to clinch the victory for you. But even if they don't you still walk away from the table smiling because you just played a great game of Dragon Diceâ„¢!

Thats what its all about.

Not trying to change the rules so you don't lose your next game.

Sorry if I got a little preachy.
Mr. Green
Back to top
 View user's profile Send private message
stormywaters
rare



Joined: 22 May 2011
Posts: 1403

usa.gif
PostPosted: Sat Mar 03, 2012 10:38 pm GMT    Post subject: Reply with quote

SpazzyP wrote:
If ID's were not doubled than Sunflares would rule the magic game. 18H worth of Sunflares roll on average around 15-16 points of magic WITHOUT doubling. But they have a chance of rolling much higher.


Not any more than they do now. They already have the highest magic average, and removing doubling won't change that.

Quote:
If you don't want ID's to double bring a Grove into the game. For instance while playing undead, place only one unit in the frontier the rest of your army at horde and home. As soon as your magic playing opponent gets a look at your armies he will most likely move his magicians to the frontier or reserves. There they will be out of harms way from your undead melee might, but ID's would not double.


Except that removes doubling for one terrain, *if* your terrain is selected. And your opponent won't run from your melee if the terrain comes up magic, so that "strategy" is out.

Quote:
Yes that strategy works only if you win the first roll, but what strategy usually doesn't.


Plenty of options exist that ignore the horde roll.
Back to top
 View user's profile Send private message
SpazzyP
dragonmount



Joined: 17 Feb 2012
Posts: 31
Location: Dickson TN

usa.gif
PostPosted: Sat Mar 03, 2012 11:15 pm GMT    Post subject: Reply with quote

stormywaters wrote:


Not any more than they do now. They already have the highest magic average, and removing doubling won't change that.


That was the point I was trying to make.

stormywaters wrote:
Except that removes doubling for one terrain, *if* your terrain is selected. And your opponent won't run from your melee if the terrain comes up magic, so that "strategy" is out.


I do see your point. But DD is a game of chance. Yes a lot of skill is involved but that "if" will always exist.

stormywaters wrote:
Plenty of options exist that ignore the horde roll.


I agree, but if we are talking about making the rules more simple it would not be for the people here that know the rules backwards and forwards. (although somethings can be a bit confusing usually a quick question on the rules discussion will clear it up). It would be for the new guy, right? and that is not a rhetorical question, I am really asking that. And the new guy isn't going to see the horde roll as something he can lose. He will see it as a huge advantage, or disadvantage if he loses. Sorry I am being long winded and kind of talking in circles.

But long story short. Yes there are many strategy's that exist that ignore the horde roll, but what newbie is going to know what those are.

I've got to tell you I kinda lost myself on that one. I got half way through the paragraph and couldn't remember where I was going with it. But I'll leave it in and see if you can decipher my madness!
Twisted Evil
Back to top
 View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    SFR, Inc. Forum Index -> 3.01 and later Rules Discussion - Locked All times are GMT - 6 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next
Page 7 of 10

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group