Jump to content

[✗] [Magic Submission] Abjuration - Complete Re-write in its Own School


Medvekoma
 Share

Recommended Posts

Ehhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, you put a lot of effort in but I can't support this at the moment. Will post more after school 

Link to post
Share on other sites

At the moment, I think the biggest issue that people have with this lore is the immense amount of things it is trying to do and the lacking coherency in the explanations of how it is able to do these things. I personally have little issue with the idea of the lore itself, other than the fact that it could ostensibly usurp anti-magic (Fi) in use and usefulness. The issues that do arise, however, are ones from a LM and MT Lead point of view. Currently, you explain the abilities poorly (with the aforementioned point of view in mind) and spend a large amount of time explaining other things. This causes confusion and misunderstandings (as seen by the four pages of questions and debates), as well as a general dislike for something that tries to do a great deal whilst explaining very little about what it can do.

 

As a potential solution, I'd like to suggest that you read over your lore and consider it as a clueless reader would. Does the lore flow neatly, with each step being properly explained before you move on? Is each step/part of the lore easy to understand? If not, how could you make it easier to understand? Do certain explanations feel vague and up to interpretation? Does it feel like some abilities of the magic could be easily abused due to so little being written about certain aspects of those abilities?

 

Analyse your magic lore and find out why people are confused. This will eliminate a lot of questions being asked. Next, find out why the remaining people dislike it. Try work with them, as people often have reasons for disliking lore. Though you may not agree at first, it is good to rationally consider them. My first iteration of the Shade rewrite had Shades able to entirely convert someone's passive mana into Amber... damn, that would have been a nasty thing to accept if the LMs hadn't thought to bring it up, even though I didn't agree with them at the time. Regardless, it was discussed and the rational action was to remove it. I'm glad I did, too. I hope the anecdote isnt too cringeworthy, and that you find some use in all this!

Link to post
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Medvekoma said:

 

It was referring to a puff of mana released away from anything that has an aura.

 

 

If the retained mana in a gem keeps the soul imprint of a mage (the specific substance that marks which soul it was derived from), wouldn't that mean mages would be able to cast straight from mana gems they create, without pre-determining the spell cast when imbuing the gem?

 

As per the states of mana lore, that is.

 

 

Once again, skip the ad-hominem part and instead write down what differs. Else it looks like an "I don't like this, you aren't a transfigurationist, don't touch my magic" comment.

I don't like this. You're not a transfigurationist. Please neglect from touching my magic which you quite evidently have no experience with. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Logically inconsistent, obligatory -1.

You're just throwing around make-believe terms, at this point.

What are you trying to achieve with this, again?

Fi magic does a good enough job of circumventing the need for anti-magic. This isn't needed nor wanted. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 11/1/2016 at 11:12 PM, Medvekoma said:

At the same time, enchanting is an Elven alternative to runesmithing, heating items is a core element in fire evocation and blocking spells is the idea behind fi-magic. 

 

...Since when is enchanting an elven thing?

 

Just to toss it out there, I don't believe he was saying that only elves use enchanting, but that with certain elves (wood elves comes to mind) hatred of void magic, they tend to look at alternatives.

 

The most widely accepted definition of abjuration magic tends to be found in DnD, so I'll quote that here:  Abjurations are protective spells. They create physical or magical barriers, negate magical or physical abilities, harm trespassers, or even banish the subject of the spell to another plane of existence.

Having read through your post, I find a bit I agree with, some I'd like to see changed... But over all gave it a +1.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not needed, we have Fi and Abjuration/Warding is fine where it is. No use fixing what isn't broken. Even then, what you're describing is teetering on the edge of being Fi plus some flavor, with the mana drains and all. I'm going to say this now: I am vehemently against this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is very very very well written and I really appreciate the work that has gone into it... However! I hate to echo another but as Bokratz/ArcanicFable/KnightArtorias/OPArchonGuy has said I too would agree that this would somewhat render Anti Magic largely pointless as whilst it does indeed have some uniqueness (and yes I am actually wholly for changes to Abjuration in its current form for the same reason) it still boils down to the same build: An Anti Mage without any of the downsides.

I personally still like a lot of the ideas that have been put into this, however, and would encourage that if it does indeed fail to pass you might consider re-working it with the current Anti Magic lore in the form of an addition or two? That might be wishful thinking on my end, but still something I'd be willing to help you out with to the best of my ability if you'd like to try it in future!
Well done on this piece of work and I wish you the best of luck on the LT vote, but it's a -1 from me I'm afraid.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As I told you on skype, abjurations are simply wards in bolt form, and weaker. There's no need to complicate it further then that, and it makes perfect sense for a transfigurationist to make things like that since they deal with bare mana. I don't support outright removing a transfigurationist ability to do this after it's been in place for actual years, and it wouldn't make any sense for this ability to be removed, since a abjuration is simply a more simple ward, and as you've said, we can still do wards. That doesn't make sense, if you remove abjuration you remove wards too, since you destroy the part that allows us to do so, control over bare mana. Overall, I say if it must be accepted, let transfigurationist keep abjuration bolts, and have this be a standalone magic.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This Lore has been denied. Topic moved to Denied Lore forum.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...