my profile | search | faq | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Wizards.Com Boards   » Wheel of Time   » Which is more important.. balance or accuracy?

   
Author Topic: Which is more important.. balance or accuracy?
Duloth
Member
Member # 34440


posted February 19, 2003 09:20 PM      Profile for Duloth   Email Duloth    Edit/Delete Post
Theres the question. To be perfectly honest, the Wheel of Time is not a balanced world. The average Aiel warrior, at start, would be a 3rd or 4th level character, as would, quite likely, the Seanchan. While, of course, or wonderful normal folk would be normally at 1st level. And, unlike the Aes Sedai, male channelers in general, whether Ashaman or not, seem to be just as good in the melee, or better, than our Armsmen friends. Especially while 'embracing' the power. (You'd think 'clutching' would be a better term for Saidin)

Would you prefer to play in a game where things were done by the book, or by balance? Many successful games have ignored balance in favor of setting/flavor, including Rifts for one of the less popular but still mildly successfull examples.

*And, wildly off-topic... I developed a skill-based magic approach for d20 a while back. It seems that Wheel of Time, more than any other setting, would truly fit with such a system.. or is the existing system a better way?*

--------------------
-D
Nyarlathotep! Not just for breakfast anymore.

Let Necromancers make Undead Armies foundation, member 000 (Thats right, Not even I'm a member)

From: Louisiana | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Elsbon
Member
Member # 25397



posted February 19, 2003 09:47 PM      Profile for Elsbon      Edit/Delete Post
Balance or accurary?

Hmm...if you can make it work, then being accurate is certainly best. For example, I don't have a problem giving Aiel/Seanchan soldiers a few levels on average, since they're generally better trained (in the books).

I do get annoyed when something just doesn't represent my interpretation of what happens in the books. I try to play things in line with how they appear in the source (or get house rules to help with it).

When you get into balance issues with PC's (i.e., channelers vs non-channelers), I think you need to be more careful. It also depends on your group.

In general, I like things more balanced myself, but having a...um, "Gandalf" like character can be cool as well (by this, I mean a very powerful PC that can't normally use this power for various reasons, but gets to break it out once, surprising the party, in a very cool scene).

I know very little and have never played it, but I seem to recall that Ars Magica may be similar, with the PC power differential. If the setting was neat enough, that could interesting.

I'm curious as to your skill based system. That would seem to handle the raw strength or potential vs. skill tension better than the current system (only represented in the rules by ability stats). However, despite the apparent flaws in the system, I feel that it works rather well (playing in our 2nd campaign now). It has some quirks, but just does the job. I certainly like it better than Dnd (granted, that doesn't say much...). [Roll Eyes]

From: Ann Arbor, MI USA | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
JosephKell
Member
Member # 99447


posted February 19, 2003 09:56 PM      Profile for JosephKell   Email JosephKell    Edit/Delete Post
This is a good question. And it all depends on the playing group. Both have merits and flaws:

Accuracy before Balance:
---Pros: It can let players get into the series, which is why they picked up the setting!
---Cons: The character path favored by putting balanace after accuracy will be used by the more powergaming players.

Balance before Accuracy:
---Pros: Different paths are usable without being overshadowed.
---Cons: Character types from the series may seem underpowered and others overpowered.

Both:
---Pros: Roleplaying is less limited by system, rules are more for combat situations.
---Cons: Diplomacy and Bluff skills... This is a sad truth. Without these skills veterns would be able to talk down trollocs at level 1...

Note about Asha'man: We have seen Asha'man fight with swords twice, both in Winter's Heart. And both of those times it was between Asha'man and Rand and/or Lan. Rand and Lan are above average swordsmen, so saying men that lost to them are also above average isn't a true or false statement. Asha'man have not had any examples of being above average in general. And actually in a sword (only) match between a man that devoted his life to the sword against a man that devoted his life to channeling, my silver and gold is on the man devoted to the sword! Most Armsman in the novels are levels 1-3.

Additional note about levels: Nothing in the rules says you can't start NPC's at levels over 1. Also most people in the Westland armies aren't Armsman, they are Warriors. Seachan and Aiel have armies entirely composed of "elite" NPCs, those with PC levels rather than NPC levels.

[ February 19, 2003, 09:59 PM: Message edited by: JosephKell ]

--------------------
Instant Message me @ JonERPG on the AIMer

Visit AielManSpear

-If you cast Meteor Swarm to avoid wasting your REALLY good spells...
-If your character sheet is longer than the Player's Handbook...
-If you have a magic item that can destroy the world...with four charges left...
-If the God of Destiny asks you what will have next...
...you might be a Munchkin.

From: California | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Snow Crash
Member
Member # 85099


posted February 20, 2003 05:23 AM      Profile for Snow Crash      Edit/Delete Post
It entirely depends on the group you are playing with. If you have a bunch of munchkin powergamers then unfortunately you have to stick with the balance. If however you a lucky enough to be playing with a group of mature people who enjoy the ROLEplaying side of it more than becoming superhuman then I would definitely go with the realism side.
From: Australia | Registered: May 2002  |  IP: Logged
Duloth
Member
Member # 34440


posted February 20, 2003 09:54 AM      Profile for Duloth   Email Duloth    Edit/Delete Post
Well, Rand was a good example. You have to admit, Dragon Reborn, taveren, or otherwise, Rand is channeler all the way, with at most one level of Armsman, from the breif time he spent training under that warder. And what happened when he got into a duel with a guy who was a master swordsman, who had been training with blades all his life? He won, though he ended up having to embrace the power and use the resulting improved focus to do so. By or d20 system, this would be a 10th-12th level Channeler/1st level armsman(or warrior) fighting against a 9th-10th level armsman in the melee.

Basically, in Wheel of Time, how good you are at combat is completely independant of 'class', but more dependant on your training and natural ability. After all... if a Channeler spends all of his time training with just one weapon, a sword, and getting better at it, and an Armsman trains with a wide variety of weapons, getting better in all of them, then even if the Channeler spends more time on channeling than weapons, he'll have trained more with a sword than the armsman. Though, the Armsman might be similarly focused and actually be better.. but then he wouldn't be any good with a bow, crossbow, or etc.

(The skill system I put at www.geocities.com/kyne2/mod20ruleset.rtf and the Magic part starts pretty far down. I designed it for a campaign, and a D&D one, but it could be pretty easily customized to Wheel of Time.)

--------------------
-D
Nyarlathotep! Not just for breakfast anymore.

Let Necromancers make Undead Armies foundation, member 000 (Thats right, Not even I'm a member)

From: Louisiana | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
JosephKell
Member
Member # 99447


posted February 20, 2003 11:34 AM      Profile for JosephKell   Email JosephKell    Edit/Delete Post
Rand is a bad example. Rand is an outlier, a statistical improbability! There is a reason why in statistics they use the Median and not the average. I am sure Asha'man (those with 1 level or more in the PrC, making them level 6 or more) can go toe to toe with a level 3 Armsman and have a long fight just just a sword, both have +3 BAB or more, 5d4+1d6+6*con modifier HP verses 3d10+3*con modifie HP.

But that is a level 6 character using its last resort against another character's first resort. Rand said to Taim, "Maybe if you knew how to use a sword, you wouldn't have been captured after you were shielded." Their swords are a last resort.

Believe it or not, but the most Powerful Power Gamers can roleplay with the best of them, and it is possible to make a character that doesn't need to ever draw its weapon (unless some newbie shoots his/her mouth off and gets everyone in trouble).

[ February 20, 2003, 11:38 AM: Message edited by: JosephKell ]

--------------------
Instant Message me @ JonERPG on the AIMer

Visit AielManSpear

-If you cast Meteor Swarm to avoid wasting your REALLY good spells...
-If your character sheet is longer than the Player's Handbook...
-If you have a magic item that can destroy the world...with four charges left...
-If the God of Destiny asks you what will have next...
...you might be a Munchkin.

From: California | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Vardelith
Member
Member # 123267



posted February 20, 2003 11:50 AM      Profile for Vardelith   Email Vardelith    Edit/Delete Post
I have to agree, that it all depends on what type of group you want to run. Personally I feel that Channelers are a LOT more powerful then regular non channeling folk, but that is tempered by the fact that once they exaust themselves they can be pretty weak! But in a lot of cases throuout the book, the channelers practice a use in moderation. They tend to use their power when they have or need to, but will do without using it if not needed!

One example of an issue that should never occur if people would play for realism, is the classic oft debated, harden air tie off let die bit. Unless the Aes Sedai was particularly evil they would not do this kind of thing! Things like this should be discussed with the group you are playing with beforehand to decide if that's how you want to play your campaign or not!

Personally in my campaigns I punish munchkin players. (this is a personal preference) I want my players to enjoy the story, to feel like things COULD go wrong for them, to be able to just squeek by! Roleplay is important and in many cases the better way for a group to gain experience when I GM. Hack and slash players tend to die and not advance as well! [Smile] For me, I'll give a player something that is compleatly unbalancing as long as they use it to bring realism to the story, they missuse or abuse an item/ power / ability that does this and it goes away!

I guess I'm saying I like realism or accuracy best! The rules put down work great in most cases, but I personally feel they could be improved in some areas. Don't we all! [Smile]

[ February 20, 2003, 11:51 AM: Message edited by: Vardelith ]

From: Medicine Hat, Alberta | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
Duloth
Member
Member # 34440


posted February 20, 2003 01:16 PM      Profile for Duloth   Email Duloth    Edit/Delete Post
Okay, so it seems most of you think this:

In Munchkin or Powergamer games you need balance.

In Roleplayer games, you want accuracy, but balance will do.

So, that warrants the question... casting balance aside, what changes would you make to make the rules accurate?

--------------------
-D
Nyarlathotep! Not just for breakfast anymore.

Let Necromancers make Undead Armies foundation, member 000 (Thats right, Not even I'm a member)

From: Louisiana | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Dave Shramek
Member
Member # 107902



posted February 20, 2003 01:35 PM      Profile for Dave Shramek   Email Dave Shramek    Edit/Delete Post
I honestly think this is perhaps the best book adaptation to a game I've ever seen. I think it all works really well. The only thing I'd do is favor XP bonuses to people who played in character for the setting.

You can't really base the game mechanics on the main characters of the books. They are all special cases from being ta'veren or surrounded by ta'veren. So, assuming everyone else in the books (all the minor characters and background characters) are realistically rendered then the game mechanics, if they accurately reflect a model of the real world (i.e. skill checks to level of ability) then I'd say don't bother changing the rules. If channelers are over balanced, they are limited by the fact that many players would want to put them in one of the Towers to get some more training, or learn a Lost Talent discovered by one of the fiction characters.

--------------------
As always, I cower in ignorance, awaiting a response.

From: Austin | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Duloth
Member
Member # 34440


posted February 20, 2003 11:06 PM      Profile for Duloth   Email Duloth    Edit/Delete Post
Can't base it on the main characters of the books? I don't see why not. In general, in a campaign, the main characters are unimportant, and the PCs ARE the main characters. YOUR party is the one that can shake the world, given time. Thats the whole point of an RPG, after all, to make the PCs the center of the action.

--------------------
-D
Nyarlathotep! Not just for breakfast anymore.

Let Necromancers make Undead Armies foundation, member 000 (Thats right, Not even I'm a member)

From: Louisiana | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Lord Schpungus
Member
Member # 111502



posted February 21, 2003 07:54 AM      Profile for Lord Schpungus      Edit/Delete Post
What he's saying is that the main characters in WoT are extra special cases, mainly because they're ta'veren or hang around ta'veren a lot. But take, for example, Gareth Bryne, or the Band of the Red Hand, or any Aiel warrior society. They are important, yes, and pretty skilled, but they don't shape world events simply by being in the room. Your PCs shouldn't, either.
From: The Global Community | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
The Great Gray Skwid
Member
Member # 34606


posted February 21, 2003 08:57 AM      Profile for The Great Gray Skwid   Email The Great Gray Skwid    Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Duloth:
Can't base it on the main characters of the books? I don't see why not. In general, in a campaign, the main characters are unimportant, and the PCs ARE the main characters. YOUR party is the one that can shake the world, given time. Thats the whole point of an RPG, after all, to make the PCs the center of the action.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again:

This is like saying "Awww, why can't I be the Messiah" in your "Career Development" course in Junior High.

If you can't have fun without believing you are the only thing between the world and destruction...then that's just pretty sad.

--------------------
Evan "Skwid" Langlinais
The Humblest Mollusk on the Net
http://www.thehumblest.net/
Ask me for information about the Texas Darkfriends!

From: The Big D | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Ringmasta
Member
Member # 66182


posted February 21, 2003 12:25 PM      Profile for Ringmasta      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
If you can't have fun without believing you are the only thing between the world and destruction...then that's just pretty sad.
I'd agree with this, but I'd also add to it with:

If you can't have fun while believing you are the only thing between the world and destruction...then that's just pretty sad.

[Big Grin]

--------------------
Mortality.net -- A Dungeon Master's Resource
Site Staff

Registered: Feb 2002  |  IP: Logged
Dave Shramek
Member
Member # 107902



posted February 21, 2003 03:05 PM      Profile for Dave Shramek   Email Dave Shramek    Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Ringmasta:
I'd agree with this, but I'd also add to it with:

If you can't have fun while believing you are the only thing between the world and destruction...then that's just pretty sad.

[Big Grin]

Awww, Rand is pretty sad, then.... [Frown]

--------------------
As always, I cower in ignorance, awaiting a response.

From: Austin | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
JosephKell
Member
Member # 99447


posted February 21, 2003 03:12 PM      Profile for JosephKell   Email JosephKell    Edit/Delete Post
The best way to deal with characters like Rand and Moridin would be to let them do practically anything they want. They are NPC's they are just another world changer for the GM to use. It is fine to give ultimate power to an NPC as long as the PC's can't tell him/her what to do!

(I have a GM character, he looks like a 8 year old boy in a white t-shirt, blue jeans, a red baseball cap, and he is always chewing bubble gum. Being above the Gods, he is a GM made flesh, he can do whatever he wants... I only whip him out to screw with the players' heads once in a while... "The door they spent hours opening the GM Kid walks through." very funny and frustrating for them.)

--------------------
Instant Message me @ JonERPG on the AIMer

Visit AielManSpear

-If you cast Meteor Swarm to avoid wasting your REALLY good spells...
-If your character sheet is longer than the Player's Handbook...
-If you have a magic item that can destroy the world...with four charges left...
-If the God of Destiny asks you what will have next...
...you might be a Munchkin.

From: California | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Duloth
Member
Member # 34440


posted February 21, 2003 08:35 PM      Profile for Duloth   Email Duloth    Edit/Delete Post
Well, I did have a thought... Channeler ability seems to be independant of physical or mental stats, independant of level of experience. Every few pages you'll see another Aes Sedai or Ashaman mentioned who grew 'incredibly powerful in a short amount of time, even exceding *insert other characters name here*'. In Wheel of Time, this occurence is pretty rare, yes.. but not really any more rare than the PCs are.

Which calls to my mind, at least, a possibility. Don't make channeling based on the class. Make it a seperate thing. Let people who want to become channelers roll a 'Power' stat, and create the skills 'Power-Weaving' and 'Embrace/Grasp'. The Power-Weaving skill would set the highest level of weaves they could cast (Max at Power Stat-10) and the Embrace/Grasp skill would set what level they counted as, and thus, how many spell slots they had to use.

Yes, I know its unbalanced, and it makes Channeling something that every power-gamer would want, since it'd offer no real disadvantages aside from lost skills, and in the case of the Males, madness. But yet, it would be a good tool to use if you had PCs who were role-players rather than power-gamers. And even if almost everyone wants to be a channeler... the males will go mad. The women.. how many main female characters in the book can't channel? And how many can?

Now.. I know this isn't balanced. Its not supposed to be. But.. opinions?

Note: One limit might be this.. if a player wants to become a channeler, and rolls under 10.. they have no power to draw on. Perhaps you could even roll for all of the PCs in secret, and have the power manifest itself, uncontrolled, in the game, until the players find out which of them can controll it. Great role-playing potential, in that case.

--------------------
-D
Nyarlathotep! Not just for breakfast anymore.

Let Necromancers make Undead Armies foundation, member 000 (Thats right, Not even I'm a member)

From: Louisiana | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
JosephKell
Member
Member # 99447


posted February 21, 2003 09:33 PM      Profile for JosephKell   Email JosephKell    Edit/Delete Post
You are right, channeling ability isn't based on attributes. And it isn't based on class.

It is based on both. A person excelling passed someone else can be an indicator of leveling, or learning more weaves--especially learning weaves that take advantage of overchanneling or new weave slots.

d20 might not be perfect, but it is damn easy to learn. Anyone that has played the West End Games version of Star Wars will agree that it was way harder to follow than d20 Star Wars.

Wheel of Time has 3 balances in it:
1. Early levels: Channelers are sad, non-channelers hold up the party.
2. Non-channelers are balanced with other non-channelers.
3. Channelers are balanced with other channelers.

--------------------
Instant Message me @ JonERPG on the AIMer

Visit AielManSpear

-If you cast Meteor Swarm to avoid wasting your REALLY good spells...
-If your character sheet is longer than the Player's Handbook...
-If you have a magic item that can destroy the world...with four charges left...
-If the God of Destiny asks you what will have next...
...you might be a Munchkin.

From: California | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
finnmckool
Member
Member # 112643



posted February 25, 2003 02:58 PM      Profile for finnmckool   Email finnmckool    Edit/Delete Post
The rules need to be balanced so you can break them for accuracy. It all depends on your campaign. For instance, my Star Wars game is REALLY big (6-8 characters with NPC's). Most of us aren't RPG fanatics, it's just something we do. Ergo, to keep the more munchkinizing amongst us from running amok and ruining the game it needs to be balanced.

However, my WoT game is a little smaller, a little calmer and we think things through more. So accuracy is more important because it's more about the characters and what they do then how many people we can kill at once.

See?

Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
Matwin Luthair Al'Ra
Member
Member # 121887



posted February 26, 2003 10:15 AM      Profile for Matwin Luthair Al'Ra   Email Matwin Luthair Al'Ra    Edit/Delete Post
I'll have to reply here. I feel that, in the books, the ability to channel is certainly in a class of its own. How many times did we see a character using the one power in a way previously unthought of? Alot, numerous times throughout the novel there are characters using "lost weaves" or "lost talents" remember when nynaeve "healed what could not be healed"? what level do you think she had achieved by this time in the novel? 3? 4? It's apparent that the ability to use a certain weave generally manifests itself in the user, and more rare where the user can "teach" him/herself how to use a new weave, unless being tought by someone else. What Im saying here is that at the GM's discretion, a character can learn and use a high level weave but still be a relatively low level PC. If I was the GM we would, for the most part, go by the level descriptions, but IF NEEDED I would give weaves to the channeler PC's.

--------------------
Be the change you wish to see in this world. - Mahatma Gandhi

From: Lubbock | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
JosephKell
Member
Member # 99447


posted February 26, 2003 12:05 PM      Profile for JosephKell   Email JosephKell    Edit/Delete Post
GM's can throw balance to the wind, but rules in print need to be balanced, that includes what is here.

And Nynaeve was level 14 at the end of book 6 and wasn't Logain restored after book 6?

The fact that he was restored entirely makes me think that restoring the opposite gender has a -6 weave level. But I don't know.

--------------------
Instant Message me @ JonERPG on the AIMer

Visit AielManSpear

-If you cast Meteor Swarm to avoid wasting your REALLY good spells...
-If your character sheet is longer than the Player's Handbook...
-If you have a magic item that can destroy the world...with four charges left...
-If the God of Destiny asks you what will have next...
...you might be a Munchkin.

From: California | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Elsbon
Member
Member # 25397



posted February 26, 2003 10:47 PM      Profile for Elsbon      Edit/Delete Post
Well, I decided to look it up before opening my mouth - and apparently Nynaeve did heal Logain (and Siuan and Leane) in book 6, later than I was initially thinking. But, I'll have to agree with Matwin here - I like the idea that if it seems to fit, and makes the story neat for you, then it's fine for a character to have something strange happen, like creating a new effect, or doing something more powerful than they should be able to. Strong emotion can go a long way in a story. [Smile]

And there was an interesting comment or two in the middle about how important the characters should be. I can see two interpretations here:

a) The main characters in the book are doing wild, cool things. Hence, since the PC's become the main characters, it makes sense for the fate of the world to rest on them.

b) The main characters in the book do wild, cool things, surpassing everyone else. Since the PC's aren't the main characters, you don't get to do crazy, wild, world-shaping things.

And of course there's a mix in between. Myself, I lean towards the first (at least eventually - you can start small), as I like the characters in an rpg to be special. But that's just me. [Smile]

From: Ann Arbor, MI USA | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Eagle Prince
Member
Member # 67693



posted February 27, 2003 02:03 AM      Profile for Eagle Prince   Email Eagle Prince    Edit/Delete Post
If by "accuracy" you mean channelers and aiel should be demigods and anything else save maybe blademaster-level Warders a 1st level commoner--gah, I've roleplayed WoT too many times with people who seem to think wierd stuff like this. Or that Randlanders have never heard of armor before, and so it has no place in the game. Or this or that, it gets really annoying.

If you are going to give aiel super-beefy stats, then they'll need a fair level adjustment to balance it out. Otherwise, you are just cheating imo. You'll get someone who loves channelers and think they are godlike, and then complain how the game is so unrealistic because a Fade can still take him down. First, I don't think they're anywhere near this powerful in the novels, but more importantly, people like this also want the extra power they think channelers have with no side effects. Like a higher ECL for example. This goes something along the effect of his 10th level channeler should supposedly be able to wipe out eight fists of trollocs and where a BM would fall to 2 fades no matter the circumstances. Sorry, if you can bat down 50 trollocs in the blink of an eye, you shouldn't get a single point of XP for it.

I think you get my point here. Even if you are some nut who thinks channelers are virtual gods, then you're no longer going to get any XP for killing of a dozen trollocs. You'll have to go up against a channeler as strong as yourself to get enough challege to earn XP... win enough of these life-threatening duals, and you might survive long enough to earn another level.

Anyway, balance vs accuracy... there are ways to balance pretty much anything, let alone something with rigid guidelines to work off like WoT novels. Saying you need to choose one over the other... well, I don't understand it. I think 99% of the people who would "unbalance their game for accuracy" are the real munchins, not some guy who's played his nonwarder swordsman for 2 years and still gets shot down because he feels by now he's earned the right to claim enough still to at least kill your average aiel warrior. [Cthulhu]

--------------------
I am the Immortal One hidden from the dawn, I am the Emperor-King after day has gone.

From: Utah | Registered: Feb 2002  |  IP: Logged
galadgawyn
Member
Member # 126713


posted March 02, 2003 11:44 AM      Profile for galadgawyn      Edit/Delete Post
Which way to go I think depends on why you are playing the game. If you are (like me) a huge fan of the series and you are playing because you want to develop/be immersed in this setting then realism is number one. If you just want to kill stuff or do cool things or whatever then you might prefer balance. However if you do a really good job at realism (assuming its based on well written books) I think it tends to sort out some of the balance issues.

For example with channelers vs. non-channelers, while in general channelers are much more powerful there are a lot of things to temper that:

channelers take longer to level up/become powerful (look at Mat and Perrin vs. Egwene and Nynevae in bk 1-3)

channelers (especially males) tend to draw strong opposition and even hatred i.e. whitecloaks always wanting to kill them, everyone wanting to gentle males, etc... (I think in the books fame, reputation and alignment play a very strong part and can be emphasized with good roleplaying, like gaining alliances and such)

they also have restrictions like the Three Oaths or the codes of honor for other groups

if they try to destroy a couple fists of trollocs there is the risk of burnout or even physical exhaustion to the point of death - while the main characters could easily do this it is clear they are the exceptions. Moraine was considered one of the strongest Aes Sedai and it would be difficult for her to do that.
As far as the power of the PC's goes, if you set it in the time of the books there is no way for them to be world shaking and maintain realism. Everything revolves around Rand and co. and he is the most powerful. Its a big world though and you can still have the characters be significant with the fate of a nation (Murandy) or group (Brown Ajah) be dependent on the PCs. If you want them to be the main power center then set it in some other time like the Trolloc Wars.

Also the fact that almost all Aes Sedai have warders should point out that they are not all powerful. For instance if a warder kills a Fade thats it but, if the Aes Sedai does, channeling can be detected and that might bring more Fades, shadowspawn, or Black Ajah/dreadlords down on top of them.

quote:
So, that warrants the question... casting balance aside, what changes would you make to make the rules accurate?

While the channeling system may work in a game, imo it's severely lacking in trying to portray channeling in the books. An example would be the character write-ups of main characters in the back of the sourcebook. They don't come close. Because of this my friend and I have only used non-channelers in our campaigns so far. We are working on revamping the whole system.

Some of the problems: not differentiating between skill, power, and potential

characters not being able to do what they could do in the books (Moraine and Nynavae channeling balefire, Rand channeling a dozen weaves at once)

don't like the system for slicing weaves

invert should be a feat not a skill (it seems its something you can do or you can't not something you practice and get better at)

not allowing enough specialization - some channelers are much better at healing than others (Nynavae, Flinn, etc.), or the Wise Woman who had developed shielding almost to a talent in book 7

there are many weaves which are somewhat off and others which are just left out (I don't have the book with me right now so I can't say which)

the idea that in order for Nynavae to be a powerful wilder (which she was) she has to have a high charisma score (which she shouldn't- she was stubborn and irritating and made people mad)

Some of the things we are planning on doing is adding a seventh channeling potential stat (which was mentioned elsewhere). This would be an indication of a channeler's raw power; Rand would be a 20, Nynavae a 16, Moraine a 12, Morgase a 1, etc. You would still need to take levels in a channeling class; any character who wants to become better has to spend time training in those skills. Also while your potential may be a 12, your actual starts at 1 and increases until you hit your max.
Another thing would be the possibility for wilders to randomly channel things they don't know or shouldn't be able to channel. Like in book 3 when Nynavae under stress channels balefire at the Myddraal. Or when Rand shields Egwene and Elayne in book 4. They didn't remember how to do that stuff after it was over but other times they did so we would give them a certain percentage at learning it.

We are thinking of allowing characters to put skill points into specific weaves. Also being able to take an affinity twice (to show special ability in earth, wind, etc.) or adding more than one level in a Talent. Also adding a couple channeling skills like Finesse to show ability at channeling with precision.

This is just a start. We are working on other stuff. If you have any feedback on whether I'm off basis or any suggestions to make on what to change or improve that would be appreciated.

I realize that this tends to be more difficult and time consuming and thats why some people may simply go for balance but, for me the realism is worth the effort.

Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged


All times are Pacific Time  
   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic    next oldest topic   next newest topic
Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | http://www.wizards.com/ | Privacy Statement



Powered by Infopop Corporation
Ultimate Bulletin BoardTM 6.2.0

Shop Games Books Magazines Stores Events Company Worldwide Community