Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Current one, unchanged.

+4 AS and +5 DMG when moving 4 spaces or more.

+2 AS and +3 DMG on Player Phase, with additional +2 AS and +2 DMG when moving 4 spaces or more.

+1 AS and +1.5 DMG for each space moved up to 4 spaces.

Current one but AS bonus is converted to DR from the end of the Player Phase until the next one.

I don't know but I want to see the results.

[Culise]

I think the best option could be to give Wind specialty against Flying types in general, since that's how most of the games do it.  Thunder and Fire would have no particular affinities, but have their own bonuses (respectively, crit-chance and raw strength) to give them their own merits.  After all, Anima mages can cast from all three without particular issues, too. 

I like Solmyr's thoughts quite a bit, too.  It also splits up the Monster catch-all into two reasonable categories. 

[Haspen]

I think we need a poll on this.

With every option properly and carefully described, and the poll closure requiring 15 or more votes.

[Solymr]

Before or after Nullify?

Btw VOTE DAMMIT
We barely get over 12 votes if I leave the poll fermenting for half a week.

[Haspen]

Unfortunately our Wyvern and Nullify proposals are kinda tied together if you look at it. I think the poll would need to cover both at once, somehow v:

[Solymr]

How? :V
I think we should do Weaknesses (covering part of wyvern special) then Nullify then wyvern classes' specials.

[Haspen]

That's even more polling than before

[Solymr]

That's because you're making more trouble than before

[Blade Master Model 42]

I think a poll to determine general weapon tree effectiveness isn't a bad idea. We'll return to nullify once that's taken care of.

[Xanmyral]

Sounds more like enemy classification has the problem instead of the weapons.

Phone. Phone what are you doing, has is a bloody word what is wrong with you.

[Blade Master Model 42]

What about Undead :V
It would make sense to make Holy magics effective vs Undead, Fire vs Monsters, Wind vs Flying and Thunder vs Wyverns.

Undead don't have any special features to warrant having an entire weapon category be effective against them.

As for weapon tree effectiveness, here is my take on it.

Wind is Effective against enemies with the flying Keyword.
Bows are also Effective against enemies with the flying Keyword.
Thunder is Effective against enemies with the wyvern Keyword.
Fire is effective against enemies with the undead Keyword.

...and that should be it, I think. I don't think monsters as a whole need a tree that's effective against them.

[Shoruke]

But great knights and wyverns are the only ones with two weaknesses are they're built like tanks anyways :x

As someone playing a Pegasus Rider, I just want to let you know that you have some reading to do.


As for the Weaknesses stuff, here's my proposal:
We sort the weaknesses into a few categories: Mounted, Flying, Armored, and Wyvern. Nullify now allows you to remove one of those four weaknesses.
Bows and Wind Magic are effective against Flying.
Thunder Magic is effective against Wyvern.
Soldiers deal effective damage against Mounted.
The poll is "Do you accept Y/N"

I'm okay with making undead weak against holy magic...
If we're going to make monsters weak against Fire Magic, we should specifically exclude Wyverns. They are already weak against so much crap.

[Blade Master Model 42]

Soldiers deal effective damage against Mounted.

*FWEEEEEEET*

No. No they don't. Soldiers get a flat damage bonus against Mounted units and that is it no it's not they also get a point of defense against them also. A class gaining effective damage against multiple other classes, especially at all times, and especially a first class is a no go.

Armored and Mounted have several weapons that state effectiveness against them. That's all they need to have effective against them. That said, Nullify for Mounted units should probably defend them from the anti-cavalry soldier bonus.

Also:

Wyvern =\= monster.

So that is a non issue. Not that all monsters should be weak to fire magic anyway...

As a side note, did anyone read those class descriptions I wrote up? Only Solymr seems to have commented on them...

[Xanmyral]

I read them. Nice, although not as descriptive as the existing ones. Bit of a non issue though, and they serve their purpose well of explaining the class. A bit of salesman fluff and I'd call it good.

Also, as a random RAI note:
The monster tag already exists, yet for wyverns it is not only not used, but even stated that they are specifically weak to lightning yet no other monster effective weapons.

In rule books, you want to explain things as clearly as you can and with as few words as possible when it comes to rules. Why the unnecessary confusion if it could be dealt with by saying they gain the monster tag?

My main point is consistency.

Also-Also: Those classes are indeed the only with two effective groups, not counting class specific effective weapons.

[Blade Master Model 42]

Well, if someone wants to expand upon what I've written, that'd be nice. I think I'm more or less tapped out on those classes.

I don't think Wyverns should be treated as monsters. That'd be even more effective tags for them, and they do not need that at all.

[Furtuka]

They've already got the dragon category and wyrmslayer yeah.