Finished: Would you like any of these new shielding systems?
Feb 10, 2014 14:03:20 GMT -5
Post by Deleted on Feb 10, 2014 14:03:20 GMT -5
I would like to introduce 3 different options for a new shield system that would hopefully make people happy in the present, even if something better still can be devised later on.
Order of Appearance
1. Reasoning
2. 6 Points of what the new system is about
3. The 3 proposals
1. Reasoning
Based on quotes from Robert Jordan at 13th Depository POSSIBLE SPOILER: srweaves.proboards.com/thread/491/shielding-system-overhaul-discussion?page=5&scrollTo=2533
And such as:
- Hearmeroar: Also keep in mind that we are playing a game, and to be honest, this is an issue of balance.
- Hopea: Now that we've recognized that game balance, fairness and RP should be considered along with, if not before, canon lore and IC perfect sense, I would like to point back to the original point of discussion - men being stronger in the Power as per canon lore.
- Asche: Ideally, I'd prefer to see a system where shielding isn't used as the primary offense in just about every situation. The current implementation is both ridiculously powerful for how reliable it is, and also runs counter to canon.
- I'd also mention that it seems to me unfair in epic hunting areas - or atleast I'd prefer not to be able to shield bosses etc.
Would also have to be partly grounded in the precedent's relating to removal of random roll:
- Precedent: melee and other skills aren't determined by random roll
- Freedom to Roleplay a character of choice
Other Factors in the Proposal:
- One becomes tired with exertion/damage to one's life
2. Proposal about:
1. For me, it gets too complex to try and represent what is finesse and what is brute force in a satisfactory way that would be simple to understand and implement.
2. My proposal is situated around:
3. Removing the Male +10 Bonus
4. Altering the Attacker/Defender Shielding Dynamic Significantly
5. Making it possible to check %HitPoints to affect ability
6. Breaking dynamic: Becomes attacker roll when trying to break
Currently:
Your total strength roll is determined as follows:
Innate Strength (1-50) + Potential Reached (Factional Advancement) + Spellcraft + Cha Mod + Wis Mod + Caster Level(s) + Gender Mod (10 for male, 0 for female) + Level Bonus Mod + 1d4
3. Proposals 1 - 3:
For all 3:
Retained: Rank Progression and Differential between Holding/Not Holding
ALL: -1 Strength per 10% hit points lost
Breaking dynamic: Becomes attacker roll when trying to break
----------------------
Proposal 1 (No Gender Distinction, Basic Defensive Advantage)
Attacking
Innate Strength (1-50) + Potential Reached (Factional Advancement) + Spellcraft + Cha Mod + Wis Mod + Caster Level(s) + Level Bonus Mod + 1d4
Defending
Innate Strength (1-50) + Potential Reached (Factional Advancement) + Spellcraft + Cha Mod + Wis Mod + Caster Level(s) + Level Bonus Mod + 1d20
----------------------
Proposal 2 (Same Gender Attack Bonus/Opposite Gender Defence Bonus)
Based on:
Well if we really want to get into lore, there's this bit of information too:
When women shield a man they must use all their strength to make and hold the shield and must not tie it (Lord of Chaos, Weaves of the Power). This is because it is harder to shield someone of the opposite sex than of the same sex:
I asked why Elayne thought even a Forsaken couldn't break the shield Adeleas and Vandene were holding on Ispan, expecting the answer that Elayne is clue-impaired. The correct answer is that holding a shield on someone depends not only on relative strength and fatigue, but also on whether the shield is held by channelers of the same sex as the victim. Thus two women (Adeleas and Vandene on Ispan, or Ispan and Falion on Nynaeve in A Crown of Swords) can hold another woman, but three women just get severed if they try to shield Rand. As a curiosity, it is also possible for multiple people to hold a shield without linking, but this is less strong and less precise, producing basically a layered shield.
- The Path of Daggers book tourAttacking Male vs Male
Innate Strength (1-50) + Potential Reached (Factional Advancement) + Spellcraft + Cha Mod + Wis Mod + Caster Level(s) + Level Bonus Mod + 1d6 [Attacking] [vs 1d20 Defending]
Attacking Female vs Female
Innate Strength (1-50) + Potential Reached (Factional Advancement) + Spellcraft + Cha Mod + Wis Mod + Caster Level(s) + Level Bonus Mod + 1d6 [Attacking] [vs 1d20 Defending]
Attacking Female vs Male
Innate Strength (1-50) + Potential Reached (Factional Advancement) + Spellcraft + Cha Mod + Wis Mod + Caster Level(s) + Level Bonus Mod + 1d4 [vs 2d12]
Attacking Male vs Female
Innate Strength (1-50) + Potential Reached (Factional Advancement) + Spellcraft + Cha Mod + Wis Mod + Caster Level(s) + Level Bonus Mod + 1d4 [vs 2d12]
----------------------
Proposal 3 (Men Slight Defensive Bonus + Rest Same as Proposal 2)
- If people want a slight advantage for men:
Attacking Female vs Male
Innate Strength (1-50) + Potential Reached (Factional Advancement) + Spellcraft + Cha Mod + Wis Mod + Caster Level(s) + Level Bonus Mod + 1d4 [vs 2d12]
Attacking Male vs Female
Innate Strength (1-50) + Potential Reached (Factional Advancement) + Spellcraft + Cha Mod + Wis Mod + Caster Level(s) + Level Bonus Mod + 1d4 [vs 1d20]
Order of Appearance
1. Reasoning
2. 6 Points of what the new system is about
3. The 3 proposals
1. Reasoning
Based on quotes from Robert Jordan at 13th Depository POSSIBLE SPOILER: srweaves.proboards.com/thread/491/shielding-system-overhaul-discussion?page=5&scrollTo=2533
And such as:
- Hearmeroar: Also keep in mind that we are playing a game, and to be honest, this is an issue of balance.
- Hopea: Now that we've recognized that game balance, fairness and RP should be considered along with, if not before, canon lore and IC perfect sense, I would like to point back to the original point of discussion - men being stronger in the Power as per canon lore.
- Asche: Ideally, I'd prefer to see a system where shielding isn't used as the primary offense in just about every situation. The current implementation is both ridiculously powerful for how reliable it is, and also runs counter to canon.
- I'd also mention that it seems to me unfair in epic hunting areas - or atleast I'd prefer not to be able to shield bosses etc.
Would also have to be partly grounded in the precedent's relating to removal of random roll:
- Precedent: melee and other skills aren't determined by random roll
- Freedom to Roleplay a character of choice
Other Factors in the Proposal:
- One becomes tired with exertion/damage to one's life
2. Proposal about:
1. For me, it gets too complex to try and represent what is finesse and what is brute force in a satisfactory way that would be simple to understand and implement.
2. My proposal is situated around:
3. Removing the Male +10 Bonus
4. Altering the Attacker/Defender Shielding Dynamic Significantly
5. Making it possible to check %HitPoints to affect ability
6. Breaking dynamic: Becomes attacker roll when trying to break
Currently:
Your total strength roll is determined as follows:
Innate Strength (1-50) + Potential Reached (Factional Advancement) + Spellcraft + Cha Mod + Wis Mod + Caster Level(s) + Gender Mod (10 for male, 0 for female) + Level Bonus Mod + 1d4
3. Proposals 1 - 3:
For all 3:
Retained: Rank Progression and Differential between Holding/Not Holding
ALL: -1 Strength per 10% hit points lost
Breaking dynamic: Becomes attacker roll when trying to break
----------------------
Proposal 1 (No Gender Distinction, Basic Defensive Advantage)
Attacking
Innate Strength (1-50) + Potential Reached (Factional Advancement) + Spellcraft + Cha Mod + Wis Mod + Caster Level(s) + Level Bonus Mod + 1d4
Defending
Innate Strength (1-50) + Potential Reached (Factional Advancement) + Spellcraft + Cha Mod + Wis Mod + Caster Level(s) + Level Bonus Mod + 1d20
----------------------
Proposal 2 (Same Gender Attack Bonus/Opposite Gender Defence Bonus)
Based on:
When women shield a man they must use all their strength to make and hold the shield and must not tie it (Lord of Chaos, Weaves of the Power). This is because it is harder to shield someone of the opposite sex than of the same sex:
I asked why Elayne thought even a Forsaken couldn't break the shield Adeleas and Vandene were holding on Ispan, expecting the answer that Elayne is clue-impaired. The correct answer is that holding a shield on someone depends not only on relative strength and fatigue, but also on whether the shield is held by channelers of the same sex as the victim. Thus two women (Adeleas and Vandene on Ispan, or Ispan and Falion on Nynaeve in A Crown of Swords) can hold another woman, but three women just get severed if they try to shield Rand. As a curiosity, it is also possible for multiple people to hold a shield without linking, but this is less strong and less precise, producing basically a layered shield.
- The Path of Daggers book tour
Innate Strength (1-50) + Potential Reached (Factional Advancement) + Spellcraft + Cha Mod + Wis Mod + Caster Level(s) + Level Bonus Mod + 1d6 [Attacking] [vs 1d20 Defending]
Attacking Female vs Female
Innate Strength (1-50) + Potential Reached (Factional Advancement) + Spellcraft + Cha Mod + Wis Mod + Caster Level(s) + Level Bonus Mod + 1d6 [Attacking] [vs 1d20 Defending]
Attacking Female vs Male
Innate Strength (1-50) + Potential Reached (Factional Advancement) + Spellcraft + Cha Mod + Wis Mod + Caster Level(s) + Level Bonus Mod + 1d4 [vs 2d12]
Attacking Male vs Female
Innate Strength (1-50) + Potential Reached (Factional Advancement) + Spellcraft + Cha Mod + Wis Mod + Caster Level(s) + Level Bonus Mod + 1d4 [vs 2d12]
----------------------
Proposal 3 (Men Slight Defensive Bonus + Rest Same as Proposal 2)
- If people want a slight advantage for men:
Attacking Female vs Male
Innate Strength (1-50) + Potential Reached (Factional Advancement) + Spellcraft + Cha Mod + Wis Mod + Caster Level(s) + Level Bonus Mod + 1d4 [vs 2d12]
Attacking Male vs Female
Innate Strength (1-50) + Potential Reached (Factional Advancement) + Spellcraft + Cha Mod + Wis Mod + Caster Level(s) + Level Bonus Mod + 1d4 [vs 1d20]
