| From: | Wafflemeisters <evamarie@**********.NET> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Pool Use (was; Summer Time) |
| Date: | Fri, 22 May 1998 21:51:07 -0500 |
>
> Mongoose wrote:
> > Ideally, If you used two or more pools, each would be reduced by the
> >same fraction as the other, as you only have so much attention to spread
> >around, IMO. This is not at all practical, but is a good "base
> >concept", I think.
>
> Agreed.
>
> > A simpler mechanic would be that any dice used in one pool that do
> >not
> >exceed those in another pool come out of both pools. Sound complex, but
> >is actually simple; If you have 8 combat and 5 magic, and use 3 magic,
> >combat goes down by 3. If you then use 3 combat, magic does not go
> >down, as combat is 5, magic 2- both go to 2. If you then use 2 from
> >EITHER, both are gone.
>
> Hmm. I'd probably take dice away from the top, so to speak. With
> 8 CP and 5 MP, using 3 MP leaves you with 5 CP and 2 MP. Using 4 CP
> drops you to 1 CP and 1 MP. "If the pool that you are using dice
> from has more dice than any other pool, treat the final level of that
> pool as a maximum limit for the other pools."
>
> Actually, I guess that works out to a "floating pool". Just take your
> largest pool (8 CP in this case), and get that many dice. You can't
> use more than 5 of them as MP.
Thats exactly the effect I proposed, if you read the wording and
example carefully. It was awkwardly put- I said using a small pool
impacts larger pools, you say using large pools doesn't affect small
ones- same thing, potAEto, potAHto...
Great minds, huh?
>
> > Does this seem reasonable? Is it a"problem" that even needs
fixing?
> >The example of mages using combat pool for damage resistance only (and
> >thus having more availible there than samuria) indicates to me it DOES
> >need fixing.
>
> Well, apart from the fact that mages tend to get geeked a lot easier
> than sams (relatively low bodies, no cyber, etc)...
Hardly. Cast an armor spell ritually (unlimited pool use) with an
earth elemental or 4 to help and maybe fetish foci, and pop it in a
lock. (OK, locks can cause problems, but now BULLETS won't). Also,
invisibility and and such means they simply get attacked less, many
times. No reason mages MUST have much lower bodies, and magic can make
up for cyber, often.
But hey, thats just my feeling. I admit, the above example is not
always a HUGE balance problem, which is why I asked if it specifically
needs fixing.
> It depends, as you implied above, on how you define a pool. If it is
> indeed "concentration and focus", then limiting the pool used/available
> is a good thing. If instead it represents something different (or
> perhaps several different things), then it might fall apart. MP doesn't
> seem related to concentration, but is limited by skill (and to an
> extent, inherent magical ability). CP is determined by attributes.
> This would seem to indicate that there are at least two different kinds
> of pools.
>
I don't think that the difference is that big, since skill in sorcery
is you sbility to focus you "gift", and Hacking is easier and less
distracting on a better computer. Even if the METHOD of concentration
is very diffrent, the effectis similar.
-Mongoose X
