I have only skimmed the Namer College. A couple of points

why oh why have ITNs been depowered. They weren't powerful enough before and now they are even weaker. (picture lots of placard waving). 

As written Bane is very overpowered, but I see that this is already going to be addressed. I idly wondered whether it would be cute to make it like Enhance, and reduce the spells BC, or Damage, or Range by X ranks.

clare
(who plays a Namer - just so you know by bias)

-- to unsubscribe see http://www.kurahaupo.gen.nz/mailing-lists.html --

Clare West wrote:

> I have only skimmed the Namer College. A couple of points
>
> why oh why have ITNs been depowered. They weren't powerful enough before and now they are even weaker. (picture lots of placard waving).

Hi Clare,

Que?  Depowered in what way?  Could you expand on that?

It's true that they only add +2% in the new version but then they only take 1/4th the time to Rank...which effectively means about double the Rank takes the same time, so if you have an ITN at Rank 6 (6 x 5 = +30%) now
it would convert to/be equivalent to having Rank 11 (11 x 2 = +22%) and the target gets -11% MR.

The depower (as such) is that they still only go to Rank 20 so their max effect is reduced.  That said, rank 10 currently takes 55 months (4 1/2 years!) for one ITN, so the only one Namers rank that high is their
own... which then gives them +50 on Banishment meaning they don't bother to Rank it... and making the introduction of similar spells like Dispel Magic far more problematic because even with a very low BC a namer with
reasonable ranks in their own ITN (and GTN) has vastly more bonus than another college could manage.  (By way of example, Mary M gets +70% when casting on herself (Rank 11 ITN, Rank 15 GTN), and I am sure other namers
are in a  similar situation).

What the reduction to +2%, 1 week to Rank should mean is that Namers may actually rank some of the ITNs they have since they're not facing such a huge training time cost.

The other (suggested/draft) de-power is that they take up MA "slots" in exactly the same way as spells.  This may not end up in the final version of True Names.

> As written Bane is very overpowered, but I see that this is already going to be addressed. I idly wondered whether it would be cute to make it like Enhance, and reduce the spells BC, or Damage, or Range by X ranks.

Hmmm... Anti-enhance?  Yeah... if people still think Bane is overpowered at -3%/Rank that would be well worth considering.

> clare
> (who plays a Namer - just so you know by bias)

:)

--

 _/_/  Peace Software New Zealand Ltd   Email: Martin.Dickson@peace.com
_/     Martin Dickson                   Fax  : +64-9-373-0401
       Analyst                          Phone: +64-9-373-0400




-- to unsubscribe see http://www.kurahaupo.gen.nz/mailing-lists.html --

Disenhancement is already in the game for an E&E mage. Phil Judd could tell
you how tough it is or isn't in practice.

Changing Bane to being -3BC/Rank OR -1 Rk of Damage /Rank, OR -1 Rk of Range
/Rank OR -1 Rk of Duration /Rank is tougher than just -3BC/Rank - it gives
flexibility of application, e.g. being able to drop damage a little may mean
it doesn't get through the party's protection at all  - its also better at
low ranks vs tough opponents, because it will always make a small difference
while BC may not. Subtle uses also become possible - dropping the duration
of someone's wings would be nasty and hard to spot, for instance.

Having said that, I'm not against the idea of Bane as a Disenhance. It just
gives options for Namers to think.

Andrew
-----Original Message-----

> As written Bane is very overpowered, but I see that this is already going
to be addressed. I idly wondered whether it would be cute to make it like
Enhance, and reduce the spells BC, or Damage, or Range by X ranks.

Hmmm... Anti-enhance?  Yeah... if people still think Bane is overpowered at
-3%/Rank that would be well worth considering.



-- to unsubscribe see http://www.kurahaupo.gen.nz/mailing-lists.html --

On Wednesday, December 6, 2000, at 01:30 PM, Andrew Withy (DSL AK) wrote:

> Disenhancement is already in the game for an E&E mage. Phil Judd could tell 
> you how tough it is or isn't in practice. 
>  
> Changing Bane to being -3BC/Rank OR -1 Rk of Damage /Rank, OR -1 Rk of Range 
> /Rank OR -1 Rk of Duration /Rank is tougher than just -3BC/Rank - it gives 
> flexibility of application, e.g. being able to drop damage a little may mean 
> it doesn't get through the party's protection at all  - its also better at 
> low ranks vs tough opponents, because it will always make a small difference 
> while BC may not. Subtle uses also become possible - dropping the duration 
> of someone's wings would be nasty and hard to spot, for instance. 

Indeed it is more powerful, except against low ranked opponents. As it subtracts ranks, I imagined it would only allow a reduction to rank 0. The fewer ranks you have, the less you have to lose. 

> Having said that, I'm not against the idea of Bane as a Disenhance. It just 
> gives options for Namers to think. 

Well this rewrite is all about giving Namers options isn't it?

clare

-- to unsubscribe see http://www.kurahaupo.gen.nz/mailing-lists.html --

On Wednesday, December 6, 2000, at 01:08 PM, Martin Dickson wrote:

> Clare West wrote: 
>  
> > I have only skimmed the Namer College. A couple of points 
> > 
> > why oh why have ITNs been depowered. They weren't powerful enough before and now they are 
> even weaker. (picture lots of placard waving). 
>  
> Hi Clare, 
>  
> Que?  Depowered in what way?  Could you expand on that? 

Well as I said I only skimmed it.

> It's true that they only add +2% in the new version but then they only take 1/4th the time to 
> Rank...which effectively means about double the Rank takes the same time, so if you have an 
> ITN at Rank 6 (6 x 5 = +30%) now 
> it would convert to/be equivalent to having Rank 11 (11 x 2 = +22%) and the target gets -11% 
> MR. 

OK mea cupla - I missed the reduction in magic resistance. I much prefer the reduction in magic resistance to the increase in base chance as an effect. I mostly take it back. Swapping the reduction in magic resistance and increase in base chance (-2%/rank, +1%/rank) would be even better but this is more powerful than things were before as it is.

> > As written Bane is very overpowered, but I see that this is already going to be addressed. I 
> idly wondered whether it would be cute to make it like Enhance, and reduce the spells BC, or 
> Damage, or Range by X ranks. 
>  
> Hmmm... Anti-enhance?  Yeah... if people still think Bane is overpowered at -3%/Rank that 
> would be well worth considering. 

As I commented in another reply, an anti-enhance is more flexible and arguably more powerful (especially against high ranked opponents) than Bane as written.

clare

-- to unsubscribe see http://www.kurahaupo.gen.nz/mailing-lists.html --