Forge of Destiny(Xianxia Quest)
- Thread starter yrsillar
- Start date
- Original Fantasy
I completely disagree.
If we had a fully formed plan, yes, executing it would be marginally easier with a 3-week than a 1-week option because it presents less risk of majority-rule tugging us one way and then another and thereby not ending up on any optimal plan. However, we absolutely DON'T know what we will be doing.
We have a baseline - we know something like 75% of what we want to be doing. The problem is that we don't know that last 25%, and if we want to choose an art that takes ~5 weeks, we don't have time to spare on starting.
@yrsillar would you be able to update the formation stuff and add the Horror to Ling Qi's character sheet?
- Location
- United States of America
Alas, we don't know it yet. Li Suyin knows it, but for us it is "unlearned"
Well my main concern is addressed(namely I want to vote for plotlines to pursue with Minors rather than people, since the minor plotlines by @yrsillar are really strong writing and picking between them is great), though too bad on the 'filler' stuff, since they're also pretty enjoyable...well I'm in literally every SV quest, so theres plenty of filler out there.
Nothing as cute as Zhengui, I assure you.
If too many of the minors are "fluff" that are slowing the pace it seems to me that the simplest solution would be to simply stop making those minors available. Sure, that might leave us with less than five minor actions per week but isn't that what you wanted?
Previously, it sounded like you're going to select our minor actions so that we finished up all the plot lines, but this description sounds like we'll still effectively be voting for minor actions just with less information about what we do and fighting over a more limited number of slots. Some clarification on whether or not the focus vote has any mechanical impact or affects storyline progression would be helpful.
I was also under the impression that we would still be voting by week, just with shorter updates due to fewer minors rather than multi-week updates, which I am less sanguine about.
Either way, our ability to plan will also need to be adjusted. We're going to have to lose the ability to sacrifice two minor actions for a major or to sacrifice a minor action to gain a major with a tutoring action. If we aren't voting on limited minor action slots anymore those stop being sacrifices and just become a free lunch. Either they need need to go away or you need to buff everyone else to accommodate our free training time. Losing those abilities in exchange for a guarantee that all important minors will be followed seems at least sort of reasonable.
I'm not necessarily opposed to accelerating but I'm going to vote status quo for now to be on the safe side in case the vote gets called before the exact mechanics of this possible acceleration are worked out, or if I don't like them.
[X] Status Quo
Last edited:
- Location
- United Kingdom
[X] Accelerate
[X] Ask Cai to commission you a Domain Weapon with the Void Shard
[X] Ask Cai to commission you a Domain Weapon with the Void Shard
Pretty sure you've just cancelled your vote.
Last edited:
I don't think it matters. It seems like YrS said the three week turn thing was a compromise since the accelerate/status quo vote is so close
- Location
- Castle
[X] Accelerate
[X] Ask Cai to commission you a Domain Weapon with the Void Shard
[X] Ask Cai to commission you a Domain Weapon with the Void Shard
- Location
- The Temple of the Winds
I find multiple issue with @yrsillar 3 week plans:
- minors are not equal. Heck, majors aren't either! Some (ie: Suyin, treasure map) have tangible, pill arts or formation, rewards, others give important information be it contextual or mechanical. The rest give neither.
- dice randomness makes it clunky, best exemple of that is the breakthrough majors. The plans will be crowed with conditionals.
- interrupts and quest rewards/results will make mid-plan votes a necessity regardless.
Overall it feels like the real issue is that there are too many weekly actions. Why not simply reduce the number of weekly actions to make each more impactful ?
That is relevant for both minor and majors. Imo, people start ignoring majors because it takes multiple major actions in a row to achieve anything.
- minors are not equal. Heck, majors aren't either! Some (ie: Suyin, treasure map) have tangible, pill arts or formation, rewards, others give important information be it contextual or mechanical. The rest give neither.
- dice randomness makes it clunky, best exemple of that is the breakthrough majors. The plans will be crowed with conditionals.
- interrupts and quest rewards/results will make mid-plan votes a necessity regardless.
Overall it feels like the real issue is that there are too many weekly actions. Why not simply reduce the number of weekly actions to make each more impactful ?
That is relevant for both minor and majors. Imo, people start ignoring majors because it takes multiple major actions in a row to achieve anything.
- Location
- Earth
You know, that's not a terrible idea. What if next turn, we had a turn just like last turn, but, it covered 3 weeks instead of 1?
Like," You have five major actions and three minor. However, I will allow up to two minor actions which are tied to major ones", but for the whole 3 or 4 week (a full month) period?
Then, one of the minors could be:
-spend time with your frieds
-work on your formations
-sort out your mother
and the majors could be
-try and reach Green Appraisal Spirit
-Do missions for the Sect to pay for "insect plan cost"
-Train this art:
-do a Sable pill week for this:
If done a 3 week basis, each new major would count for 3 previous ones.
Keep the conditionals simple. Like:
Train TRF to next level, then Train AS.
- Location
- Canada
[X] Accelerate
It wouldn't play well with pill weeks, for one thing.
Why not leave the voting the same (perhaps allowing five unattached minors) but just leave it up to your discretion what actually gets written? That way you don't have to futz around with the vote mechanics. Just cull what's written so that minor or purely mechanical stuff only gets a paragraph or so of summary instead of being used to generate a 1k fluff scene.
- Location
- Here
[X] Status Quo
[X] Ask Cai to commission you a Domain Weapon with the Void Shard
[X] Ask Cai to commission you a Domain Weapon with the Void Shard
- Location
- Dreamland
- Pronouns
- She/Her
[X] Accelerate
[X] Ask Cai to commission you a Domain Weapon with the Void Shard
Honestly either accelerate or status quo seem okay to me, but I'll lean toward hastening the time when yrsillar can get rid of the current chunky system, since it seems to be causing a lot of issues for him and is hard to balance (see domain weapons requiring multiple balance passes).
[X] Ask Cai to commission you a Domain Weapon with the Void Shard
Honestly either accelerate or status quo seem okay to me, but I'll lean toward hastening the time when yrsillar can get rid of the current chunky system, since it seems to be causing a lot of issues for him and is hard to balance (see domain weapons requiring multiple balance passes).
I'll dissent from Ark here, the dice on the flying sword is fine exactly as it is. 38 is within the range where the multi attacker penalty matters and within the range where luck matters and within the range where a stage advantage matters. Yes, someone won't be torn apart by a flying sword, but that's not underpowered, that's balanced.
Well, is the problem with flying swords or is the problem with us? How good are our defense dice supposed to be compared to everyone else?
I mean, if you're really worried about it you can just a slap on a base +10 die bonus to domain weapons, or a bonus based on cultivation level (7 for us, more for Meizhen), maybe multiplied by domain.
Actually, before that, we need to make sure that there is a problem. A flying sword attack should be roughly equivalent to a talisman weapon+ a technique. A weapon that was actually "three orders of magnitude better" would deal a thousand bonus damage, not just two more than the cheap example saber.
Suppose Meizhen had a weapon strong enough to justify her dismissive opinion of the example weapons: DV10, +8 dice, AP7, +5 bonus semi-perfect, +1 bonus perfect. Plus passives, and any buffs that affect flying weapons. That seems a lot more threatening.
It is true that any attack worth its salt needs to have AP, or else a tremendous amount of damage, but that just means competent cultivators will have that AP.
Black Noise
Curious
- Location
- About 1AU from Sol
The dice are balanced (somewhat low without passives, but a respectable baseline).
The issue is with armor vs AP, and bonus damage vs ablative and perfect defense. Without techs or appropriate support passives flying swords will be kind of underwhelming, and outright ineffective against someone defensive like us.
Arkeus
Crazy cat guy
- Location
- France
I agree with you, it's balanced. But I agree with you because I believe a domain weapon without domain weapon art shouldn't be as strong as a powerful tech that's backed by 3 different arts.
Basically, I believe that a domain weapon should not be considering powerful against peers until we get to green 3+ and have arts designed to use them.
- Location
- UK
I'm kinda neutral on the pacing discussion, but for domain weapons, if we want them to be used immediately even when they shouldn't be useful for straight up fighting, maybe another mechanic could be added.
For example, if a domain weapon acts as a focus of the domain, then a clash between them could be akin to a clash between domains, and if say we win the clash, the opponents domain gets shut down for a turn. This way the inferior domain weapon user would be mostly/totally without domain bonuses. Not a big deal for us as our domain bonus is kinda low right now, but it will quickly become important. I also kinda like the idea of a side domain struggle going on alongside the fist fighting or whatever.
Basically, I feel like it's accurate domain weapons aren't super combat effective atm, but there should still be a bonus if you can overpower the enemies, thematically speaking.
For example, if a domain weapon acts as a focus of the domain, then a clash between them could be akin to a clash between domains, and if say we win the clash, the opponents domain gets shut down for a turn. This way the inferior domain weapon user would be mostly/totally without domain bonuses. Not a big deal for us as our domain bonus is kinda low right now, but it will quickly become important. I also kinda like the idea of a side domain struggle going on alongside the fist fighting or whatever.
Basically, I feel like it's accurate domain weapons aren't super combat effective atm, but there should still be a bonus if you can overpower the enemies, thematically speaking.
