next »

[Kalis]

If you get too hung up over the letter of the rule and not the spirit of the rule, then you end up with stupid broken crap.

Thing is, that none of us are qualified to say what the spirit of the rules are(or even if they exist). Maybe Anima Studio designed the Metamagic stuff with the idea of Darsch Schneider and his crazy Dispell Bond shields, and want mages to run roughshod over melee.

[Lia Valenth]

Thing is, that none of us are qualified to say what the spirit of the rules are(or even if they exist). Maybe Anima Studio designed the Metamagic stuff with the idea of Darsch Schneider and his crazy Dispell Bond shields, and want mages to run roughshod over melee.

I have to disagree, you can tell by how things are written, context clues, other rules, and official errata/clarification what most of the rules are meant to mean. The only reason a group such as these forums could not come to an agreement on things such as this is people who would make outrageous claims that are obviously not true and hold onto them against all evidence.

In example, I have admitted that, technically, you are correct about using the ability when you cast the spell and it lasting until you end the spell, making Perfect Shield extremely powerful, so I will admit that officially my reading is a HOUSERULE. However I could cling to my reading and argue it while getting nowhere as being both the spirit and RAW of the ability, as that there is a small string to grasp here.

[Gimp]

If you get too hung up over the letter of the rule and not the spirit of the rule, then you end up with stupid broken crap.

Thing is, that none of us are qualified to say what the spirit of the rules are(or even if they exist). Maybe Anima Studio designed the Metamagic stuff with the idea of Darsch Schneider and his crazy Dispell Bond shields, and want mages to run roughshod over melee.

Which would be a good way to ruin the game, and hence give anyone considering it the chance to use a logical alternate interpretation that maintains game balance.
 
Any person playing the game is perfectly qualified to determine what they see as the spirit of the rules, so long as they are striving to keep the game balanced and interesting for all types of players.
 
Anima the RPG is not a tabletop game, where players are vying with each other for victory.  It is an RPG, where the players should be working with their GM to insure the rules are interpreted in a way that allows balance and fun for all players involved.
 
Any time players or the GM find a rule they feel unbalances the game, it is in the best interest for the group as a whole to shift the interpretation they are using to maintain balanced and interesting play. 
 
You only 'win' an RPG if all of the players involved, including the GM, are having fun together.

[Sharpandpointies]

As usual, I'm going to applaud Gimp for his comments on the nature of RPGing....  :)

[Lia Valenth]

I often disagree with Gimp, but I am in complete agreement on this one.

[Kalis]

Anima the RPG is not a tabletop game, where players are vying with each other for victory.  It is an RPG, where the players should be working with their GM to insure the rules are interpreted in a way that allows balance and fun for all players involved.
 
Any time players or the GM find a rule they feel unbalances the game, it is in the best interest for the group as a whole to shift the interpretation they are using to maintain balanced and interesting play.  
 
You only 'win' an RPG if all of the players involved, including the GM, are having fun together.

It isn't about winning or losing in an RPG and, I think, you know it. It is the idea of certain classes having a higher combat power than others.

As a general example, freelancers are not as good in combat as a dedicated warrior, but make up for it in other areas.

Similarly, most mages are good at intellectuals, but can also be designed to different specs based on what magic they have. Ones that put their all into being killing machines in battle, will generally be killing machines in battle. Ones that focus on stealth will generally be stealthy. And so on.

The entire idea of magic's game design in Anima seems to be, if you are willing to dump zeon and magic levels into doing it, you will generally do it very, very well, but once you are out of zeon you aren't really any better in any area except intellectuals. Oh, and that this can be balanced by fluff restrictions that make the commonfolk mess their pants when they see you doing it.

edit: cleaning format

[Gimp]

That was my point.  You 'win' an RPG by having a fun and interesting game where players have fun rather than by meeting TTG style victory conditions.  A 'win' is simply when everyone has fun.
 
A good RPG balances the powers of individual classes to make the various classes have appeal, rather than create several classes nobody will ever use because they don't work effectively, and which unaware players might accidentally choose to their great frustration later on.
 
If a group finds their interpretation making a limited range of classes far more effective overall than other classes, either the game is poorly written, or they are interpreting rules poorly to give advantages that shouldn't be there.
 
Anima is fairly well written, even if sometimes poorly translated, so that leaves individual group interpretation the most probable cause of unbalanced game structure.

[Kalis]

That was my point.  You 'win' an RPG by having a fun and interesting game where players have fun rather than by meeting TTG style victory conditions.  A 'win' is simply when everyone has fun.
 
A good RPG balances the powers of individual classes to make the various classes have appeal, rather than create several classes nobody will ever use because they don't work effectively, and which unaware players might accidentally choose to their great frustration later on.
 
If a group finds their interpretation making a limited range of classes far more effective overall than other classes, either the game is poorly written, or they are interpreting rules poorly to give advantages that shouldn't be there.
 
Anima is fairly well written, even if sometimes poorly translated, so that leaves individual group interpretation the most probable cause of unbalanced game structure.

It has nothing do do with winning at rpg's and I feel it is bad faith for you to say it does.

Certainly good balance in abilities can be important, but it isn't really the final arbiter of whether a game is good. I realize that Anima is unbalanced, I still have tons of fun playing it(though with basically a TPK by our GM last session, I don't think we will be playing for awhile).

If you will notice, one of my first responses to start this debate was to a person talking about what he considered the most powerful defense in the game to be(Lama Tsu and Erudition mostly).

I merely pointed out that the predetermined magic projection metamagic is a much better defense than the one he proposed(especially with Perfect Shield), and explained how the ability is such a good ability that it breaks the game as written. Simply saying, "well that ability works differently in my game because I realize that as written it is gamebreaking, so I have houserules to contain its madness", does not change the fact that as written it is broken for both attack and defense, unless you plan to go over level 17 or so.

[Lia Valenth]

I merely pointed out that the predetermined magic projection metamagic is a much better defense than the one he proposed(especially with Perfect Shield), and explained how the ability is such a good ability that it breaks the game as written.

But you read it one way, others read it another way. Which is what this argument has become. I admit that the way I read it at first, that you have to pay the 200 Zeon every time you defend/attack with it was incorrect officially, but you can read it that way from the RAW. However, my second part, about the fact that not applying "Special Combat Modifiers" being a "Limit" and therefore taking the penalties for Blind, etc. might be how it should be read and does make this a lot less ridiculous. In fact either reading makes this go from an ability that breaks the game to one that makes you really strong unless certain rare things happen.

In a related note can anyone find a section on "Special Combat Modifiers"? Because I cannot.

The point is that these are readings, interpretations, not technically HOUSERULES. While the difference may seem small it is not. But, I think this has come to a "needs a ruling by Anima Studios" topic, anyone know how we might get that to happen?

[Lizbeth]

Which would be a good way to ruin the game, and hence give anyone considering it the chance to use a logical alternate interpretation that maintains game balance.
 
Any person playing the game is perfectly qualified to determine what they see as the spirit of the rules, so long as they are striving to keep the game balanced and interesting for all types of players.
 
Anima the RPG is not a tabletop game, where players are vying with each other for victory.  It is an RPG, where the players should be working with their GM to insure the rules are interpreted in a way that allows balance and fun for all players involved.
 
Any time players or the GM find a rule they feel unbalances the game, it is in the best interest for the group as a whole to shift the interpretation they are using to maintain balanced and interesting play. 
 
You only 'win' an RPG if all of the players involved, including the GM, are having fun together.

I agree about that. But I have to point that this statement is correct for any RPG, not only for Anima.