RE: A look at defense values (maxes?)

[Daniel Lawrence <dan@aquest.com>]

-----Original Message-----
From:	Sean L. McLane [SMTP:zodo@laf.cioe.com]
Sent:	Wednesday, June 24, 1998 3:51 PM
To:	gmlist@cioe.com
Subject:	Re: A look at defense values (maxes?)

<major -snip->
>
This has been a pet peeve of mine for a while now, and I've not really said anything about it because I knew that it would be futile to do so.  Hopefully, with this mailing list, set up for rational discussion of items in the campaign that we all love (of course we love it, or else we wouldn't have kept playing for so long), I might be able to bring up this issue that has been nagging at me.
Ever since we first had a system for players to create magic items, there have been a number of changes to that system, each one to make it harder for the players to make Magic items. It has devolved to a point where it is hardly economical to create a magic item.

Dan Replies:

	Your opinion only Sean. I believe each re-write made it simpler and clearer what the effects of
creating items entailed. And yes, a lot of excesses got cleaned up in the last re-write.

Sean continues:

Hundreds, if not thousands of items exist that are impossible to make under the current system, and of those that are possible, a great many would require more resources and experience than any sane person would be willing to expend for the minimal return. By making it nigh impossible for players to do something worthwhile with magic item creation, it has been made improbable for the items to exist at all. If it is desired that players not make permanent magic Items, then don't provide the system. Do some other Deus ex machina (gods know there's enough of it already in the campaign) for the creation of permanent items, like something that certain high level priestesses of A'tena do.  Since Priestesses of A'tena are NPCs only (with almost no dispute from players or GMs on that so far), players would never have the means to create permanent items, and there would be a more rational explanation in game as to why such items exist.

Dan interjects:

Well, Tarus makes many of the strange and interesting items.... Whoops... the adventureres killed him.

Sean continues:

(as a brief tangent, It is curious that on a world as magic-heavy as Jaern is, there is no God of Magic)
In any case I've rambled too much. Before we argue any points further, we should keep in mind that Dan has expressed EXTREME hesitancy to implement any changes in the system, so we might want to determine whether it is worth our effort to even bother expending the energy to make the arguments before doing so, lest we find out that after hammering something out, Dan is just going to Veto it.
Dan replies:

	Ahem. The game was and still is being written by Myself and Bob Blake. The campaign is mine. The Fantasy club is its members. It is in my best interest to be responsive to the best group of playtesters out
There.

	However, running up and telling me that a particular rule will fix things is very premature. AQ is my
baby and that means I AM protective of keeping it true to MY vision. It is not a compromise of hundreds
of different players and potential designers.

	If you wish to have more of an input to this design process.... Do these things:

1) Outline a potential problem
2) Show how it effects player's fun, playability, and realism in that order
3) ..... if you wish, propose a direction for a solution.
4) Understand that I am just as likely to solve the problem in a way I believe fits in with AQ

Things to NOT do to get a change:

1) Tell me what it must be
2) Make the change related to the reason you think your most recent adventurer got torqued.
(This one put 2 strikes against you in my book. I am NOT here to change the rules to make
 sure your adventurer lives)
3) Argue emotionally rather than rationally.
4) Make it a political issue
5) Be impolite about it.

Please notice that there are those whom have ideas RADICALLY different then mine whom have
ended up getting the most input into these issues because they are polite, rational and treat me
(and conversely I treat them) with something approaching respect.

Honestly Sean, this is more for everyone's view rather then being specifically meant for you. 
And as to me vetoing things.... Well I have a hard drive FULL of errata that shows I DO change
things. So if you have an issue wish is well thought out, and approach it properly I shan't veto
things just to throw my weight around. But it is important to notice that the rules, and the base
setting... Jaern as a whole....  Are legitimately issues wish I will keep to MY vision of them.

And lastly, I do recognize that the club's player age is above the age that AQ is targeted at...
the 12-14 year old gamer. So it is possible that a slightly different balance of realism/playability
is in order. So I am working with the senior GMs to create some alternative rules and equipment
for use locally in our campaign. But these rules will be consistent with the AQ rules in general and
will be carefully considered before being implemented.

					Dan