Subject: Re: Unidentified subject!
From: Lari Kuitunen (myrsky@dlc.fi)
Date: Wed Aug 18 1999 - 17:01:48 EEST
---------- > From: Juha Jantunen <talgor@iki.fi> > To: majik-design@majik.netti.fi > Subject: Re: Unidentified subject! > Date: 17. elokuuta 1999 15:58 > > On Wed, 18 Aug 1999 15:38:59 +0300 (EET DST) Atte Koivula <yorka@dlc.fi> > wrote: > >The magical subsystems have limitations concerning what > >symbols are available. For example, elementalists might > >not have \"plantkind\", \"flesh\" and \"nature\" symbols. > > ...but since one can learn any system one wants (?), is there much point > in doing this? Could simply be that magicians in a given region are only > using certain symbols for reasons other than "universal law"... Tradition, > rules of society, the prefenreces of their god(s), or something... the point in this system is, that since for example "healers" can't learn chaos-symbol, healers won't be able to go around casting chaos bolts, and "mages" won't go around casting heal the world spells. there is no "character class", there idea is that mages have their symbols in "different language" than healers, so that if you want to learn healing spells, you learn the healer-type magic-symbols, which can't be combined with mage-language. so every "class" casts their spells using the same symbols, but in different ways. there are no restrictions though, if you want, you can be a good mage AND a good healer, but then you'd have to have learned mage's way of casting spells, PLUS healer's way. since you can't combine the two ways of casting spells, a good healer who wants to try casting spells in mage-ways will be just as good as a newbie mage. don't get this wrong, there is no class named "mage" or "healer" there is just ways in which magic symbols are channeled, each good in different aspects of magic. and there are no restrictions on how much of them you can learn, only restrictions are that you can't combine different ways of casting spells, and that some ways don't have all the symbols available to them. > >Also, the reason we have classes is that not all symbol > >types are available for all classes. Like divine magic > > Ach... too much playing MUME again with its classless system. So Majik > WILL have character classes...? mmmm.... bad for the roleplaying > element... very artifical IMO... (if you meant something else, please, > explain it to poor stupid me... -_-') check out the previous :) - malekith
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b25 : Tue Feb 12 2002 - 00:03:14 EET