Dead pretender poll

[Nagot Gick Fel]

Originally posted by PDF:
Shouldn'it be fairer if defender wins in this case ?
If I've understood the mechanisms (Astral + 1D6), then currently a +1 advantage in Astral gives an attacker 72% to win, and even with -1 he still has 50% !

As I understand it, with a -1 disadvantage the attacker gets only 42% chances to win. Actually the attacker always gets (6-difference)/36 % better odds to win, as long as the difference is less than 6 (then it's either suicide or automatic victory).

[Kristoffer O]

Originally posted by Jasper:
I typically like to have Pretenders who can fight well in battle, and losing them due to random chance just happens. It's frustrating when it's due to random chance (e.g. a 30 gold mortal commander attacking my Medusa, not being stoned, actually hitting, and then doing 50+ damage in one swing, but it's not that bad because you had to account for the chance when creating your Pretender anyway.

Note that this poll is a bit self fulfilling: I've never _lost_ a Pretender to Mind Duel, as I rarely play with Astral on a Pretender, and when I do I try to have lots. I have killed Pretenders this way...

After trying Astral Pretenders, I've softened my anti Mind Duel stance, but the expense of at least Astral 5-6 and risk of Astral Pretenders repeatedly dying to Mind Duel still makes me avoid playing them.

Mind Duel is enough to make _many_ players use house rules to ban it's use, and IMHO pretty much hoses Marignon, and greatly adds to Pythium's power (errr, assuming Communion adds to Mind Duel, which I can't be sure about).

Hmm, yes, it was a bit self fullfilling. I happened to have a third question in my poll setup and wasn't sure how to formulate my question. Take it for what it is (almost pointless).

My main interest was how often people lose their pretenders and how they take it. It is less fun to play when your enemy has almost given up, just because he gambled with his god and lost.

Regarding communion: I'm not sure, but I believe it has an effect. I also believe that all communicants will suffer from the same fate if one of them is slayed in a magic duel (this might be Dom II, or might not be implemented at all, I'll have to ask JK).

Regarding the initiator winning ties. Do you believe the opposite would lessen the impact of magic duels in pretender design and in marignon-arco/pythium balance?

I am feeling a hostile usenet dominion with a strong order scale altering my perceptions.

[Pocus]

I would prefer the defender to win tie. Because defenders are generally weaker than the attacking mage. This would help a bit Marignon, Jotun, Ctis, etc. as they would dare a bit much field all their astral mages into battles.

Have you tried to field Witch Hunters (150 gp and astral 1) or Grand Master (270 gp and astral 2) versus Arcoscephale? Ouch, you are left with a bunch of shortcircuited dead mages. These nations (the astral 1&2 level) would be more playable in these circumstances.

[PDF]

Originally posted by Nagot Gick Fel:

quote:

---

Originally posted by PDF:
Shouldn'it be fairer if defender wins in this case ?
If I've understood the mechanisms (Astral + 1D6), then currently a +1 advantage in Astral gives an attacker 72% to win, and even with -1 he still has 50% !

As I understand it, with a -1 disadvantage the attacker gets only 42% chances to win. Actually the attacker always gets (6-difference)/36 % better odds to win, as long as the difference is less than 6 (then it's either suicide or automatic victory).

---

You're right, D6 are "discrete" and odds can't be 50 % !
Anyway I'd prefer defender to win ties so the attacker has to take more risk. In this case at same Astral level attacker will have 42% to win, and at advantage of +1 will have a 58% chance, seems fair to me.

[ October 06, 2003, 21:09: Message edited by: PDF ]

[Jasper]

Bold text originally posted by Kristoffer O:

My main interest was how often people lose their pretenders and how they take it. It is less fun to play when your enemy has almost given up, just because he gambled with his god and lost.

I suspect that people who play risky combat pretenders are prepared to deal with the consequences. The skill and item loss from death actually aren't _so_ bad, but getting a bad unhealed affliction can be devestating.

Considering all the powerfull magic running around (including cheap healing magic that will save you from near death!), it seems odd that afflictions are so permanent. This colors the discussion of Curse too.

You seem to have drawn a lot of ideas from Ars Magica, why not treat healing the way they do? Have a 2 nature skill "Heal Affliction" enchantment that costs gems 5-10 "Corpus Vis".

Regarding communion: I'm not sure, but I believe it has an effect. I also believe that all communicants will suffer from the same fate if one of them is slayed in a magic duel (this might be Dom II, or might not be implemented at all, I'll have to ask JK).

Ouch! That could be devestating... Both sides would boost from communion, and the first one to win a Duel would probably win the rest as well.

Regarding the initiator winning ties. Do you believe the opposite would lessen the impact of magic duels in pretender design and in marignon-arco/pythium balance?

Well, it would lessen the impact of Magic Duel, but I still like the Attacker winning ties. The attacker is taking a great risk, and the oppurtunity cost of the time to cast a spell is significant. These costs need to be offset by some advantage, or IMHO Magic Duell will rarely be used outside of extreme skill difference.

IMHO a better tweak would be to simply have Magic Duel do 200 fatigue damage, perhaps with a chance of causing feeblemind. Don't other similar mind attacks work this way?

I am feeling a hostile usenet dominion with a strong order scale altering my perceptions.

Usenet has an _orderly_ dominion? Heh, you must have a damn good flame/troll filter. ;-)

[Jasper]

Bold Text Originally posted by Pocus:

I would prefer the defender to win tie. Because defenders are generally weaker than the attacking mage. This would help a bit Marignon, Jotun, Ctis, etc. as they would dare a bit much field all their astral mages into battles.

Have you tried to field Witch Hunters (150 gp and astral 1) or Grand Master (270 gp and astral 2) versus Arcoscephale? Ouch, you are left with a bunch of shortcircuited dead mages. These nations (the astral 1&2 level) would be more playable in these circumstances.

But the weaker mages can also stand to gain from the attacker having a Magic Duel edge, as they have a reasonable chance to start a magic duel themselves and win -- even against a mage with more skill.

If defenders win ties, then casting Magic Duel would be spending time to risk a mage in order to maybe a _cheaper_ mage. You'd want to know you had at least +2 and probably +3 more Astral than your target before considering Mage Duel.

[licker]

Easy solution...

A tie results in the death of both (all) mages involved.

Or a tie results in some amount of fatigue for both mages, say 150+