Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


About hellgeist

  • Rank

Contact Methods

  • AIM
  • MSN
  • Website URL
  • ICQ
  • Yahoo
  • Skype

Profile Information

  • Location
    Seattle, Washington, United States
  1. I don't have Arcana Exxet, and until it becomes available in English, I'm using Core. However in the face of a spell description like the one you wrote (Total control with the valid assumption that it is the same as Summoner's Control), then I'd default to a power struggle - each side would roll D% and add their Magic Projection or Control (respectively) - the higher result attaining influence over the creature. Binding does indeed present a problem to Wizards and Domine, as it can't really be turned around with another contest. Once Bound, the creature then 'belongs' to the Summoner as long as they possess the object, and the entity cannot be affected by further attempts to control, banish, etc. until released.
  2. The Summoner's Control abilities do not come with a host of other ki powers or spells - that is all they have, and they have to work very hard to be good at it. A Summoner is able to do these things through secret formula passed down among Summoners and taught to them specifically, they are unique, specialized skills. In the rule book it is described in this way: "the character invests Zeon points to alter the Soul Flow and influence supernatural creatures." For supernatural creatures that are not undead, the Soul Flow is their source of existence. That is far more powerful than any spell cast on them, or a voluntary pact no matter how it is stamped. Simply put, creatures between worlds cannot resist this kind of power, and must answer to it for their very existence. This is described in the rules pretty clearly: "if the roll is successful, the character takes control over the entity, which can't do anything to stop it." That means, a pact made with an ordinary being, or a spell they are being controlled with would be broken when this kind of compelling force is placed upon them. The only exception to this is when a Summoner's Control ability is already in effect, in which case the Summoner already controlling the entity may resist or counter attempts to Banish or Control by another Summoner. Summoners may not be able to punch mountains into pieces with ki or wield high magic, but they really should be respected for these 4 abilities.
  3. On page 15 of the GMs Toolkit they give an example for calculating available magic levels for starting characters based on the supernatural level of the campaign (low, med, or high). In that example they state that Natural Knowledge adds to the levels granted by Intelligence to derive a new total Magic Level. "A spellcaster with 10 intelligence and the advantage Natural Knowledge of a Path that consequently would have a magic level of 90 (50 from its Characteristic and 40 from the advantage), is in a medium supernatural campaign." etc.. This establishes how they intended Natural Knowledge to work, but it also raises the question (again) of how much of your knowledge are you 'authorized' to use at the start of the game? I use their tables on pg 15 as a guide, and allow 10 magic levels to become 'accessible' to the character per level, aside from any they purchase with DP. That is to reflect the growth of practical ability, as it differs from theoretical knowledge.
  4. In my post I simply addressed Light and Dark as concepts. If the writers or translators for Anima dont know their concepts, then its up to the users of their materials to decide whether to preserve real concepts we use in our language and understanding of terms, or a game someone made that has this stuff mislabeled or misrepresented. Your descriptions of the factions are much more in line with Good and Evil as percieved by modern minds, than Light and Dark. As was pointed out earlier, and is usually pointed out in these kinds of discussions, Light is not the same as Good, and Evil is not the same as Dark - in concept and in practice.
  5. The way I handle it is like this - Anyone with the intelligence of a child should realize that there is a difference between light and dark. In the light you can see things, in the dark, you can't see things. Seeing things means you know what is there, which means you can think about it clearly, or its obvious and self explanatory - nothing is kept from you. If you don't know whats there, that means your either ignorant of it and have to function on instinct, or its secret - kept from you on purpose, and you have to figure things out. Quick Reference: Light - understanable, obvious, structured Dark - instinctive, mysterious, chaotic You can put good and evil into any of those things, but light and dark are still different from each other, and very interesting because of that. ~H
  6. Lia: " First if the problem is that the player does not understand the game well enough to make a good character that is a problem with the player not the rules, and the GM's job to explain how it works. Uh, hold on there - I've been GMing this game for months, and I don't even know the game well enough because I haven't read Arcana Exxet, Those Who Walked Among Us, and Gaia Book II. Those contain essential information to understand how this game world works, and I don't know Spanish, so reading pdfs is not an option. Some things have been pulled from those volumes and put online, but they are fragments without enough context to understand what their place and meaning are in terms of the default Gaia campaign scenario. Add to this the terrible condition of the rules themsevles - there are so many of them that are written so vaguely that you could justly rule on them in two opposing ways. If it was very clear and concise, I could see how it should just fall to the reader to learn the skill of powergaming with it. But its not clear, and its not balanced. A balanced system is one in which every archetype can be reasonably match to any other in terms of power throughout all levels, not just at 10+. How does a Wizard get to level 10 at all, when they cannot be competitive with the threats that are suitable for other classes? It just would not realistically ever happen. Magic would become a dead art because no fledgelings would survive. Lia: "Third, Weak offensive or defensive spell paths is an option (personally Essence is my third favorite book.) and the GM has to incorperate the fact that they are not a good combatant and make challenges for their abilities. If the GM only has combat challenges then yes, these builds will not work very well. But this is a problem of an individual game, not a problem of the rules." It IS a problem of the rules. Every other class and power set (Ki, Psi) is set up to be very competitive in terms of conflict from level 1 onward. Magic classes are not. I've play tested this, and even destruction mages are no match for Ki users and Psychics. Their sole and only chance for survival in a match is to succeed with their magic shield for enough rounds to accumulate a powerful enough attack. Hoping for initiative is asking to die by your 2nd or 3rd fight. Assuming your opponent can't see your spells is also a bad idea, unless all your fighting are low level NPC warriors/guards. Lia" If your saying a wizard or warlock is weaker than other classes due to magic being underpowered I disagree." You are free to disagree all you want. I'm just responding with my own experience and tests using this system over the past 6 months (Core rules, and Gaia book 1). You are obviously a powergamer, but let me try one more time to communicate to you the fact that not all players are powergames, nor should they be. I've been a GM for many years and used a number of systems, some good and some bad. I know when I'm looking at a problem - if Anima is played by non-powergamers who are not studying every rulebook in print like their grad degree depends on it, they are going to have way too many problems surviving as a mage. Even if they do powergame it, there ends up being online one kind of mage who can limp along - the kind that has all the same 'required' Advantages, items, tweaks, and exploits. I can make an infinite variety of Ki users who will all enjoy a competitive edge against any threat, but on average, a wizard is going to be toast in combat, and a major liability to the party once their zeon runs out (and they need a month to rest). This last point is too often ignored - on a long adventure, when everyone else can press on after a night's rest, a wizard is dead weight without their zeon. Anything over a day of downtime is enough to get the group killed if they were relying on the wizard for anything. Seriously, a character cannot obtain enough CP to cover all these holes.
  7. There's all kinds of fun things you can do with math and special ability stacking for an extremely specialized build. Its called powergaming, and you can make any class in Anima look great if you do it - especially when all your looking at is their Level 15 build. Everybody is going to look good at level 15. The problem is, this is a roleplaying game. Not all players are powergamers, nor do they understand the rules well enough to create a build that works. On top of that its very unrealistic, considering the campaign setting, for any wizard to have reached a position of such extreme class evolution to even be a candidate for training to become the kind of monster you'd want to build. Magic is in it's twilight in Anima, and only exists in very small secret covens scattered throughout the world. At the height of magical development (perhaps in the Chaos Era), wizard universities would be more likely to train and guide candidates toward such extremely specialized roles. Add to this the fact that an acutal roleplayer may have a concept in mind that they would like to play (for which an extreme powergamer build has no room), or they may have a liking for one of the magical paths that is not good with damage (Essence for example). My point has been, from the beginning, that an average player who is not powergaming can make a character that is viable and competitive with other classes during the levels prior to level 15 unless they choose wizard or warlock. That is because the system was over-balanced to the detriment of magic. Anima as a game system favors all other abilities.
  8. Relying on specific spell effects to cover the debt of a failed archetype and it's mechanic is not a good balance IMO. This sets the expectation that most of a path's spells are going to be unbalanced against the caster, not to mention the debacle with magic shields. You can't say that just because a character who (through whatever miraculaous sequence of events) made it to the ability to cast Divine level spells, has somehow justified their broken archetype. Sorry, that doesn't fly.
  9. Lia Valenth said: Arikail said: It's worse than that. The +5 DP per level is 2CP. Now, if you can get a kind GM, might be able to get it for better. Oh. Well. That's ridiculous. You guys must think I'm a curmudgeon by now, harping on and on about how magic is essentially nerfed in this game in comparison to Ki and Psychic. But when you add things like this up, yes it becomes rather ridiculous, doesn't it?
  10. I built out the entire path of Chaos magic for my campaign. Its a 60 page supplement now (with an attached bestiary and adventure module). Chaos in my campaign is the primal source of the magic paths, and therefore aligns with all paths except Necromancy (which opposes all). This is the piece that was cut out of the Anima scenario, and it's absence has made the current reign of technology possible (PiTS). If you add it back in, the Imperium finally have something to fear. Moreover, the 12 paths align in a very beautiful way that makes a whole lot more sense than the current one. I wasn't going to share this publicly, as I have borrowed from Warhammer Fantasy, and various images on the internet. However, if you think along the lines I have indicated, I think you will get the idea. If anybody is specifically interested in this, send me a PM.
  11. Natura is the same as Gnosis, but its the level of Gnosis possessed by an entire species. It applies only to Natural (physical) creatures, and represents the average starting value of Gnosis, although an individual character from that species could have more Gnosis than that. You can look at Natura and see clearly how Ebudan and Duk'zarist (for example) will have more Gnosis on average than humans.
  12. Darkwings said: What was disliked was the "50 DP" and the budget limit, not the stuff behing the price tag. In the end it's a matter of "I don't want to spend that much", not the same with "It's not possibile to get that". The polar opposite of roleplaying, if you ask me. If the price was 20, then would it have been better? How? Since when RP is depends on how high your Attack skill is? If starting with an 80 or a 90 instead of a 120 and a leather cloak instead of a full plate and a white horse __at the first level__ is preventing you from roleplaying, you're doing it wrong. A 50DP budget limit is a guideline, not a commandment written in stone. If your campaign is mid-level supernatural, then its certainly possible that your character may have a been accepted into a coven of highly talented warlocks somewhere.. a hidden group that is an exception to the average, and whose teaching system is unique. Perhaps to undergo that warlock training you must become possessed by a spirit for a while or endure some other strange trial that pushes the limits of the tuition experience. In those conditions, it would certainly justify, if not call for, some modifications to the class structure. The same goes with schools of the martial arts, and the qualities of the fighting ability and ki powers associated with it. Not all schools are equal, and some masters are better than others, as are their students. Watch ANY martial arts movie, and you will see this is the common theme. These 'pricetags' are just markers to show how the game designers have attempted to balance their system. But as they say in the book on pg 222 (Changing the Rules), its your campaign, and if you deem it necessary after careful consideration, you can change a rule in order to create an enjoyable play experience.
  13. Lia Valenth said: I don't like the official rules, If you have an idea of how to make a more balanced way of allowing more points for mechanics to allow martial arts and modules to be more accessable they would be appreciated, but I don't want the rules to stay as they are so explaining why they should to me isn't going to do anything. Would like answers to 1 and 5 though =] I am exactly in the same position as you are with this, but instead of being frustrated about the limitations to martial arts, for me its the lame way that magic was 'balanced'. In my experience, the Ki/Martial Knowledge/Martial Arts system is like the keys to the bank. Its so powerful and so easy it just flies directly opposite to anything I would think of as game balancing. One item you guys are not discussing at all, and that is where all this knowledge comes from, how it is dished out, and who controls the gates. If you want to learn ki, or magic spells, or a martial art, wouldn't you think the bearers of this knowledge are responsible people? If not, they'd be dead people, so lets assume they are responsible - you'd know that teaching someone everything they want to know as soon as they want to know it is very very unwise. That front loads a young stupid person with the tools they need to destroy themselves or others. That puts the responsibility on the teacher for creating such a monster, and they simply would not do that. Just because you technically could gain access to these powers, skills, abilities right at the technically precise moment that DP are available and then spending them like your a stock market jockey is itself a form of metagaming and powergaming. You've stripped away the RP element, and so the system looks like its got problems. Well, if you strip away the all morals and social order and let humans do what their instincts drive them to do, guess what happens? I don't think Anima was intended to operate like a machine, you *have* to wrap all this stuff into a scenario where it could make sense - wrap it in your campaign that includes your house rules. Its better to do this than to try to produce something that has mathematically perfect balance. Reality doesn't even work that way, why should fantasy?
  14. A damage barrier makes you immune to physical weapons with a base damage equal to or less than the damage barrier's rating. If you had a damage barrier of 60, and an army of common men rushed at you with longswords, or shot a rain of arrows on you, you would be completely unharmed. Inanimate objets can have damage barriers too. For example, a stone wall will never be harmed by a dagger, no matter how well the attack is delivered, or how strong its user is. Its simply not an effective tool against a stone wall.
  15. Darkwings said: Sorry if I seem edgy on the terms, but this could break a character... No need to apologize. Our group has gone through 3 retcons and two restarts because of this exact type of issue. Being restricted to the basic core English rulebook has also been a serious pain. Whether official rulings are forthcoming or not, what we've found to work is just to decide on one interpretation, or create a House Rule that wil make the game enjoyable and fair to both those who benefit and those who do not. Basically - will the GM be able to maintain campaign balance and allow the change? We have a running list of amendments and customized rules for our campaign - maybe years down the road when all the books are published in English we won't need this, but right now we do.
  • Create New...