04-06-2018, 01:47 AM
(This post was last modified: 04-06-2018, 01:47 AM by Dane Regan.)
@Trix: And, again, that's a contradiction with a very core aspect of the rules:
Phasing gives an advantage against "physical" attacks. Or elemental/energy attacks give an advantage against phasing.
The general point here is that the type of damage shouldn't (and doesn't, in most cases) matter. Like, if I shoot Trixie in the face with a bullet. And then do that with a fire spell (same drawbacks and stats). Both will do the exact same damage.
Yet, why should one bypass phasing where the other doesn't? Or, why does phasing give an advantage against one type of attacks? That means our bullet-heavy gunner will suck against someone with phasing. But someone with identical moves made out of energy blasts and such (i.e. same strength, same drawbacks, and same stats for the purpose of this argument) will be able to shoot a phasing person easily.
It leads for an unfair divide, and can prompt: "We don't want people to pick characters based on perceived advantages and disadvantages, or characters who use many elements to have an advantage over those who are specialised."
The whole point of the OV is that every character should be potentially viable, as everyone is subject to the same sense of balance. If you make a lightsaber and a longsword, both the same size with the same drawbacks, they will be identical in strength, even if (outside of the OV) the lightsaber would be able to slice through the sword.
I think that should summarise all the points here? Either way, let's leave it here now.
Quote:Moves, whether offensive or defensive, may not have benefits against particular elements or character types. For example, an attack which pierces water shields, or a shield super-effective against fire. This is because due to the nature of our site, some characters may solely utilise a particular elements like flame or electricity, whereas others may use several elements, or original elements that exist only in their own fiction. We don't want people to pick characters based on perceived advantages and disadvantages, or characters who use many elements to have an advantage over those who are specialised. Therefore, these elements are to be regarded as "fluff". If you want to give your move fodder by saying it only works against evil characters or mechanical characters, that's your choice, but it won't improve the move's efficacy or give you any special advantage, because it is purely fodder.
Phasing gives an advantage against "physical" attacks. Or elemental/energy attacks give an advantage against phasing.
The general point here is that the type of damage shouldn't (and doesn't, in most cases) matter. Like, if I shoot Trixie in the face with a bullet. And then do that with a fire spell (same drawbacks and stats). Both will do the exact same damage.
Yet, why should one bypass phasing where the other doesn't? Or, why does phasing give an advantage against one type of attacks? That means our bullet-heavy gunner will suck against someone with phasing. But someone with identical moves made out of energy blasts and such (i.e. same strength, same drawbacks, and same stats for the purpose of this argument) will be able to shoot a phasing person easily.
It leads for an unfair divide, and can prompt: "We don't want people to pick characters based on perceived advantages and disadvantages, or characters who use many elements to have an advantage over those who are specialised."
The whole point of the OV is that every character should be potentially viable, as everyone is subject to the same sense of balance. If you make a lightsaber and a longsword, both the same size with the same drawbacks, they will be identical in strength, even if (outside of the OV) the lightsaber would be able to slice through the sword.
I think that should summarise all the points here? Either way, let's leave it here now.