Log in

I forgot my password

Search
 
 

Display results as :
 


Rechercher Advanced Search

Latest topics
» Marionette
Jump on the changes EmptyDecember 2nd 2018, 2:31 pm by +/-

» suck on my magnum dong
Jump on the changes EmptyOctober 18th 2018, 9:25 pm by Gemini

» It's my birthday.
Jump on the changes EmptyOctober 4th 2018, 8:20 pm by Gemini

» EW
Jump on the changes EmptySeptember 9th 2018, 3:53 am by Gemini

» What are Your Current Plans for Your Character?
Jump on the changes EmptyFebruary 11th 2018, 7:33 pm by Chastelle

Statistics
We have 3557 registered users
The newest registered user is Shirou Seeker of Duckness

Our users have posted a total of 143994 messages in 12544 subjects

Jump on the changes

Go down

Jump on the changes Empty Jump on the changes

Post by Lenneth on September 26th 2013, 2:42 am

Simple idea simple concept I want to present before retreating away.

More then one cost per ability Option for people.  BAM *max 2 or 3 at best*

Example a single fire ball spell has two cost, one for a smaller fire ball and the higher for a larger sphere.

Why? Personally I think it would add more tactics then having static cost in battles and open some creative role playing for people to fight with. It'd also mean people can plan more easily for future expansions of their character rather then either just using slots for their current power or waiting through tons of dull rpgs battles till they are strong enough to use and make what they really want.    

In this day and age of the site I feel the concept of over powering your foes in battles is much to common which in reality is only one way to win. Slightly of hand, deception, strategic plays other means to control the flow of battles. This would hopefully give people more options to what to use their abilities for and how to use this in different scenarios.

Also please note that this does not mean at all about giving a single slot an enter-illy different ability, i'm not trying to cram as many effects into less slots ( no fireballs turning into ice unless that was the original intent of the spell) varying costs should simple be extensions of the spells used like a stronger version of it or weaker for those special moments.  To how degree of level  of changed should be judged as thus if it was the spell was a single cost itself.

The floor belongs to you guys, Why or why not should this be a thing. Be honest and give your thoughts and  please no " Its just always been this way so why change it?"

___________________
Jump on the changes 4adc872d-7859-4686-911a-d2ebdb7e9ee8_zps6f3b92dd
Lenneth
Lenneth
The La Vaeas of Darkness

Post Count : 2787

Back to top Go down

Jump on the changes Empty Re: Jump on the changes

Post by Etzolix on September 26th 2013, 2:46 am

1) This used to be a thing, which is why I assume, Lenny is bringing it up.

2) I only removed it when I was in charge because I was trying to implement changes to make it more like the old site (how the old site was when I joined) in attempt to make it as popular as the old site was.

I should've never taken it away to be honest.

3) I'm cool with it as long as there is the 3 cost limit at max for these types of abilities and, as Lenny already stated, there are not unrelated add on abilities.

___________________



Profile


In this cold reality,
I made this selfish war machine.
Etzolix
Etzolix

Post Count : 10136

Back to top Go down

Jump on the changes Empty Re: Jump on the changes

Post by Zihark on September 26th 2013, 11:37 am

If this gets implemented, there should be a setback to having multiple costs as opposed to those who keep one cost.

___________________
Destroy all that is good, so that all that is evil may flourish.

Jump on the changes ZiSig
+100 posts
Zihark
Zihark

Post Count : 2910

Back to top Go down

Jump on the changes Empty Re: Jump on the changes

Post by Etzolix on September 26th 2013, 11:47 am

Anything particular in mind?

___________________



Profile


In this cold reality,
I made this selfish war machine.
Etzolix
Etzolix

Post Count : 10136

Back to top Go down

Jump on the changes Empty Re: Jump on the changes

Post by Yima on September 26th 2013, 12:26 pm

At the moment multiple costs must take up a slot for each individual cost as if it were its own spell and I agree that there should be some sort of cost because if there is not then it is easy to argue that we should have more slots if every spell can count as 3 slots worth of spells.

___________________
Count= 1062 + Current Account

"There is a fine line between genius and insanity; I use it as a jumping rope"

Feel free to send me any feedback you have about site and or ideas.  ^_^

If you have a topic that you want to discus at length to improve the site please do so in the suggestion section so we can all be a part and move forward from there together.

An Amv I Like
Yima
Yima

Post Count : 6411

Back to top Go down

Jump on the changes Empty Re: Jump on the changes

Post by Zihark on September 26th 2013, 12:31 pm

I'm thinking plus 5MP for each additional spell.

For Instance:

Staff Logic:
Fire: 10MP
Fira: 20MP
Firaga: 30MP

Approval 1:
Fire: 10MP
Fira: 25MP

Approval 2:
Fire: 10MP
Fira: 25MP
Firaga: 40MP

First upgrade +5
Second upgrad +10

So as staff we grade the spell on what we think it should cost, then at 5, or 10

___________________
Destroy all that is good, so that all that is evil may flourish.

Jump on the changes ZiSig
+100 posts
Zihark
Zihark

Post Count : 2910

Back to top Go down

Jump on the changes Empty Re: Jump on the changes

Post by Shirou on September 27th 2013, 11:58 pm

Personally, I think it's a nice feature to have varying levels of spells. Like, since it's pumping more MP into the same spell, making it more effective, I don't think it should take up another slot. I don't really think it should have much drawbacks either. I mean, it makes sense, doesn't it? The more powerful you get, the more powerful form of a spell you can have.

However, if this does go through with no immediate drawbacks, we should limit the creation deletion to either once a year, or only allow three creation deletions.

Edit: I mean under the assumption that it would only allow three costs, which I think is a drawback enough.

___________________
"Hey Shi get back here silly!" Etzolix said running naked and ended up in front of people. "...." "Awkward.."

[23:25:24] Zihark joined the chat on 10/17/2011, 11:25 pm
[23:27:16] Zihark : I SUSCEDE SHIROU VELOX, YOUR IDEA WAS BETTER

[02:13:16] Etzolix : YOU WON'T
[02:13:18] Etzolix : I GOT YIMA ON A LEASH

[1:41:03 AM] "Ansem": I only have
[1:41:09 AM] "Ansem": 500 munny
[1:41:20 AM] "Ansem": ....IMA WELFARE PIMP

Shirou
Shirou

Post Count : 6133

Back to top Go down

Jump on the changes Empty Re: Jump on the changes

Post by Zihark on October 10th 2013, 11:58 am

We're doing the content deletion now.

Is this going to be implemented or not?

___________________
Destroy all that is good, so that all that is evil may flourish.

Jump on the changes ZiSig
+100 posts
Zihark
Zihark

Post Count : 2910

Back to top Go down

Jump on the changes Empty Re: Jump on the changes

Post by Shirou on October 10th 2013, 12:14 pm

No.

If you want multiple costs for a spell, it'll have to take up multiple slots.

___________________
"Hey Shi get back here silly!" Etzolix said running naked and ended up in front of people. "...." "Awkward.."

[23:25:24] Zihark joined the chat on 10/17/2011, 11:25 pm
[23:27:16] Zihark : I SUSCEDE SHIROU VELOX, YOUR IDEA WAS BETTER

[02:13:16] Etzolix : YOU WON'T
[02:13:18] Etzolix : I GOT YIMA ON A LEASH

[1:41:03 AM] "Ansem": I only have
[1:41:09 AM] "Ansem": 500 munny
[1:41:20 AM] "Ansem": ....IMA WELFARE PIMP

Shirou
Shirou

Post Count : 6133

Back to top Go down

Jump on the changes Empty Re: Jump on the changes

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum