@Eventru:

I've been logging in and skimming threads, but I'm still not sure why tuning was given to mages.

If we look at Bards, Druids and Wiccans they got a second attack while Guardians got an extra/modification to existing attacks.

Without having much of a look into the mob weaknesses and resistances it seems immediately obvious that tuning is superior if only because you can just tune out any resistances, if you aren't doing full damage to a mob it's your own fault. I'm not quite sure of any reason not to tune a staff to 100% except in cases where the weaknesses/resists are equal for the damage types.


That being said I'd be interested in looking at the spread of damage types available, if only because of the comment that restrictions on tuning will hurt mage bashing. Immediately guilds such as the Moondancers and Bards come to mind, both have the choice between a 100% magic attack or a fixed mixed damage attack, they can't, for example, strip out the cosmic damage type when it doesn't suit them and they will have to accept that but if mages are forced to work the same way it will hurt them? This sounds rather weird.

@Eventru:

I've been logging in and skimming threads, but I'm still not sure why tuning was given to mages.

If we look at Bards, Druids and Wiccans they got a second attack while Guardians got an extra/modification to existing attacks.

Without having much of a look into the mob weaknesses and resistances it seems immediately obvious that tuning is superior if only because you can just tune out any resistances, if you aren't doing full damage to a mob it's your own fault. I'm not quite sure of any reason not to tune a staff to 100% except in cases where the weaknesses/resists are equal for the damage types.


That being said I'd be interested in looking at the spread of damage types available, if only because of the comment that restrictions on tuning will hurt mage bashing. Immediately guilds such as the Moondancers and Bards come to mind, both have the choice between a 100% magic attack or a fixed mixed damage attack, they can't, for example, strip out the cosmic damage type when it doesn't suit them and they will have to accept that but if mages are forced to work the same way it will hurt them? This sounds rather weird.

I think that's a bit of a missed argument. Comparatively, it'd be like Moondancers only having Moonfire. As-is, if they're up against something with a fire or holy resistance, they can use magic (moonburst). If a Nihilist is up against something with unholy resistance, they can switch to poison/psychic. If a bard is up against (and so forth) - they have options. Mages do, as well, in the form of tuning. They, like everyone else, are limited to one or two types. The only difference is that they get to choose the weighting, whereas bards/guardians don't.

In other words, if we didn't give them tuning, we'd have had to give them a different, 100%-type attack, to put them 'on par' with everyone else (so 1 full-type and 1 mixed-type).

Fitting as-is, I think, since they are, after all, masters of their element (and again, I feel the need to stress they don't get 'any type they want' - they're limited to whatever they have always had).

Tuning was added because of the introduction of mobs resistances/weaknesses. Lobs have a slight resist to asphyx, and moderate resist to cold. Untuned, that's 75%(well, not fully 75%, but still a large chunk) of my damage thrown out the window, against the one astral mob I -know- I can deal with unless I get swarmed by linked lobs. A large number of Astral mobs have poison resist, and equal amount of blunt resist/weakness, and variable for aspyhx. If tuning wasn't put in, something else to compensate the lack of damage against Astral mobs would have had to be put in for mages or there would be little to no chance of them -ever- hunting Astral since they'd be doing far less damage than before. While I hate the idea of 100% poison damage, I also hate the idea of not being able to effectively bash Astral, when I'm already a squishy little mage. That's just how I view things.

I think that's a bit of a missed argument. Comparatively, it'd be like Moondancers only having Moonfire. As-is, if they're up against something with a fire or holy resistance, they can use magic (moonburst). If a Nihilist is up against something with unholy resistance, they can switch to poison/psychic. If a bard is up against (and so forth) - they have options. Mages do, as well, in the form of tuning. They, like everyone else, are limited to one or two types. The only difference is that they get to choose the weighting, whereas bards/guardians don't.

In other words, if we didn't give them tuning, we'd have had to give them a different, 100%-type attack, to put them 'on par' with everyone else (so 1 full-type and 1 mixed-type).

Fitting as-is, I think, since they are, after all, masters of their element (and again, I feel the need to stress they don't get 'any type they want' - they're limited to whatever they have always had).

I know exactly what you meant, and I'm also telling you that you would find a strong push (by at least one admin!) for there to be 100% cold, 100% asphyx, 100% cutting, and so forth options available to mages. That was the entire reason we brought in tuning - the fact they can pick fractions was more an added on feature.
Oh, ew. That's what everyone has a problem with, I think. That added to this next thing is pretty obnoxious.


I think you're carrying the issue way far afield - if the problem is that one or two damage types available to mages have minimal DMP, then that's something we can address. I really don't believe 100% cold or 100% fire is a problem - no moreso than 100% magic has been for moondancers, for example.
This is what I was calling for from the beginning, the other tuning things were secondary suggestions, not the main issue.

It's a red herring of an argument - the (perceived) problem isn't switching damage types, it's that some have available to them damage types with minimal mitigation.
See above?

Restricting access to said damage types isn't going to fix the problem (and only hurt mage bashing) - if there's problems, we should fix them, not apply band-aids so one class can function better than others or worse than others or however it is today with the latest problems.
Mage bashing wasn't bad before.. They do the most single burst damage and have access to forcefield for lulzy hp-like values.

We want surgical repairs where possible - this isn't surgical, this is a finger band-aid for a broken nose, as far as I can tell. It won't solve anything regarding the actual issue.
One surgical thing-> add in a few ways to get common dmp to the odd types.

If we'd rather, however, we can go back to old mages, then give aquamancers a 100% asphyxiation (appropriate for drowning!), Geomancers 100% poison, aeromancers 100% lightning, pyromancers 100% fire attacks, and call it a day.
Still doesn't fix the issue of some of those being better then others. Those are at least possible to account for, you can get tattoos based on your enemy orgs.

However, I realize that it A.) will allow mages a variety of bashing options and B.) will give them the same options we've allowed guardians/wicca/druids, however it will not C.) address the fact some damage types have far fewer DMP available than others.

Restricting tuning beyond what exists won't add C into the solution set, it'll just remove A and/or B from it.

Well... two or three isn't it, unless you include blast. Let's also not forget druids, the closest analogues who received a 100% damage type attack in this addition.

Oh yeah, I understand that something needs to be there. What I am saying is that what everyone else got is the "something else".

You are missing the actual comparison though, I expect that there is likely a mob on astral that has fire resistance but holy weakness (and possibly magic neutral), a MD can't just say "well I'll just use holy" they will have a portion of their damage reduced and, depending on the variables, this may give them more or less damage.

Well... two or three isn't it, unless you include blast. Let's also not forget druids, the closest analogues who received a 100% damage type attack in this addition.

Tuning actually doesn't give me the mental impression of master of element, though this is likely because my opinion of magic users is that those who require crutches(tools/gestures/etc) are actually weaker than those who don't.

I guess, though I think that's a bit of a weird stance. Druids are the ones hopping about and squawking and chittering, and prancing! I agree with your stance, but I don't really include 'focuses' as a 'crutch'. I'd consider chittering to squirrels (or prancing about as you call on Stag or roaring when you call Bear and such forth) or using an athame as a crutch (or any tool for a ritual, really), but not so much crafting a staff to amplify elemental vibrations. That's more of a feat of 'higher' magic - forging focuses from magic to amplify magic.

I don't really include Blast - it's sub-par damage formula kind of leaves it out. My point was only that Mages got something akin but a little different, that in the end serves much the same person. In that situation you offer, instead of using moonfire, they can use moonburst. Lo, options. If the monster is resistant to all three, well, they're in the same boat as a mage going up against a monster with their resistances.

I guess, though I think that's a bit of a weird stance. Druids are the ones hopping about and squawking and chittering, and prancing! I agree with your stance, but I don't really include 'focuses' as a 'crutch'. I'd consider chittering to squirrels (or prancing about as you call on Stag or roaring when you call Bear and such forth) or using an athame as a crutch (or any tool for a ritual, really), but not so much crafting a staff to amplify elemental vibrations. That's more of a feat of 'higher' magic - forging focuses from magic to amplify magic.

(Not to speak ill of low magic users, it's just less 'refined' in my mind, more raw, natural)

My, tangent.

Agreeing with Enyalida, the other route though is that you learn to do those things by rote and they are learned at a level where you are very inexperienced. Can't remember bonding with nature but isn't it more stand there, everything bonds and there's a little bit of floating or something? The highest powers represent the point of mastery, something like moonburst is a small gesture and application of will

If, in the example, the creature had magic resistance too then MD gets even weaker against them even though they have one damage type the mob is weak against. I'm not sure what tuning is really doing other than giving mages two to three single damage attacks and am trying to think of a reason not to think of them that way, which makes the closest comparison the harmonics weapons which cost 10 power and gems while also requiring you go back to the guildhall. (though the damage types are quite nice for researchers)

I call that the difference between power and skill, which to some degrees are equally useful, but that's an IC discussion!



That may be why it's irksome, everyone got one extra skill, mages got 2-3, one for each type they have. And yes, getting something shiny is nice (yay not cutting/blunt), but no addition will ever get away from comparison. I've kind of said what I mean to on that, and on adding in ways to get dmp to the odd types that didn't crop up much before.

I get to do 1 100% damage type, and 1 fixed, mixed-type attack. Mages get to do at least 2 different 100% damage type, and many more combinations of their types. That's 1 power each time, but for more vesatility then anyone else who cares. Link astral once and get enough to change twice .

I still don't think that's the main issue, but arguing that tuning>lightningbugs/wasps is totally laughable.

Mages got 1 new skill that allows them to fully choose their damage type from the damage types that they already had. Only ones that got a damage type added were Pyros and I'm not even fully sure about that, though I recall the wiki saying that their staff was 100% fire before tuning.

Tuning cost one power each time, even to revert back to regular damage spread, so if you're fighting in an area with multiple mobs with different resist, it's one power to switch tunings each time.

Fitting as-is, I think, since they are, after all, masters of their element (and again, I feel the need to stress they don't get 'any type they want' - they're limited to whatever they have always had).

I guess, though I think that's a bit of a weird stance. Druids are the ones hopping about and squawking and chittering, and prancing! I agree with your stance, but I don't really include 'focuses' as a 'crutch'. I'd consider chittering to squirrels (or prancing about as you call on Stag or roaring when you call Bear and such forth) or using an athame as a crutch (or any tool for a ritual, really), but not so much crafting a staff to amplify elemental vibrations. That's more of a feat of 'higher' magic - forging focuses from magic to amplify magic.

Change the damage type from cold!?!

Blasphemy!!!!