| |
In a message in another thread,
someone made a comment that we should not have
too many mages/wizards in our armies.
Unfortunately, in the "army" (actually, population)
that I'm building, I've already got a dozen or so wizards,
most of them "bad guys", and I'm in the process of making
a few more.
Also, I've got several of the Lego dragons,
in addition to some "dragon younglings" [1]
as the aerial force for my army.
The single largest "uniform" contingent that I've got
is about 12 to 16 or so Dragon Master soldiers
(a year or so ago, I hit a Kaybee Toys here in the mall
when they had all their remaining stock of a DM polybag set
on clearance sale...).
I have 30, 40, MAYBE as many as 50 or so soldiers total,
no more than a half-dozen or so of any one "type"
(except for the DM soldier mentioned above).
Thus, as I see it, if I want to build an army worthy of
(in-character) respect, I'm stuck with using the wizards
and dragons as the main source of strength for my army.
Comments? Feedback? (But, please, no flames... ;-)
Thanks,
Franklin
[1] - Take one alligator/crocodile, one pair of dragon/bat wings,
and two 1x1 tiles w/ clip. I'll post pictures someday. . . .
I still haven't gotten a digital camera for my own.
Franklin W. Cain | fwcain@yahoo.com
| http://members.tripod.com/fcain
| http://members.tripod.com/fcain/lego/want_list.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------
USE OF MY EMAIL ADDRESS FOR UNSOLICITED COMMERCIAL PURPOSES
IS _STRICTLY_ PROHIBITED. . . . MAKE MY (LAWYER'S) DAY, PUNK!
|
|
| |
In lugnet.castle, Franklin W. Cain writes:
> In a message in another thread,
> someone made a comment that we should not have
> too many mages/wizards in our armies.
>
> Unfortunately, in the "army" (actually, population)
> that I'm building, I've already got a dozen or so wizards,
> most of them "bad guys", and I'm in the process of making
> a few more.
I guess personally I don't have a problem with this. In my view Castle World
is a place to consolidate all our creations into one place and create stories
which cross one or more kingdom's. I personally will probably only have one
maybe 2 wizards plus some healers and maybe 1 dragon.
I really don't see a problem with the charictaristics of one kingdom being
different from the others. Let me give you one example from a series of books
I have been reading. I know I have plugged these before but again these are
the Terry Goodkinds "Sword of Truth" novels which I highly recommend if you are
into fantasy novels like The Hobbit etc.
Anyway in these books the lands are divided into thirds and each is protected
by a barrier that at the begining keeps the folk in one of the lands from ever
coming into contact with the others. One of the lands had no majic at all.
Another had lots of Wizards and Sorceresses. The Third was rules by a single
evil Mage and no other majic was allowed. Without giving away the story these
lands do end up meeting as the barriers come down. It is really a well written
story and I hope you try them out.
What I am getting at is just because you have lots of Wizards does not
necessarily make you stronger than someone else. You have different abilities
for sure but they could be countered by differing abilities of other nations
that may or may not use majic. Plus seeing we are kind of writing this as we
go why not let there be variety and see how events evolve and take shape. I
think it could be really cool.
Eric Kingsley
The New England LEGO Users Group
http://www.nelug.org/
View My Creations at:
http://www.nelug.org/members/kingsley/
|
|
| |
In lugnet.castle, Franklin W. Cain writes:
The title of this thread reminds me of the excellent novel,
_Too Many Magicians_ by Randall Garrett (I think). It's a
classic 'locked-room' murder mystery with a twist - it
happens in a world where magic works, at a convention of
wizards. And yet, it's still a mystery how the murder is
committed...
> In a message in another thread,
> someone made a comment that we should not have
> too many mages/wizards in our armies.
That was me. I didn't want to stomp on any feet, so I'll
elucidate further below.
> Unfortunately, in the "army" (actually, population)
> that I'm building, I've already got a dozen or so wizards,
> most of them "bad guys", and I'm in the process of making
> a few more. • <snip>
> Thus, as I see it, if I want to build an army worthy of
> (in-character) respect, I'm stuck with using the wizards
> and dragons as the main source of strength for my army.
First, I don't *necessarily* see this as a problem. If
someone were fielding an army of a hundred troops *and*
said that every one was a trained master magician that
was the equal of Mephisto - then it would seem to me
like they were being a little bit unrealistic.
Remember that the chief goal of CW is for everyone to
have fun, and while one person may have fun having an
indestructible army of warrior-mages, it won't be fun
for the people who have to deal with them. (I realize
that's not what you're doing, Franklin, just making a
point.)
So I personally don't think your cadre of wizards is a
problem unless you want each of your wizards to also be
the most powerful mages on the planet. This is especially
true since your army has other weak points - it's size,
for example.
Perfect people and things are boring to write - or to read
- about. It is the flaws that make them interesting. 8)
J
|
|
| |
In lugnet.castle, Franklin W. Cain writes:
> In a message in another thread,
> someone made a comment that we should not have
> too many mages/wizards in our armies.
>
> Unfortunately, in the "army" (actually, population)
> that I'm building, I've already got a dozen or so wizards,
> most of them "bad guys", and I'm in the process of making
> a few more.
I see nothing wrong with having lots of wizards. I've got a pretty good number
myself, around 12. I think it is just a matter of personal preference.
>
> Also, I've got several of the Lego dragons,
> in addition to some "dragon younglings" [1]
> as the aerial force for my army.
As do I. I think I am up to about a dozen of them, also. I'm considering
having an aerial battle between the Dragons and the (soon to be constructed)
Airships. :)
>
> The single largest "uniform" contingent that I've got
> is about 12 to 16 or so Dragon Master soldiers
> (a year or so ago, I hit a Kaybee Toys here in the mall
> when they had all their remaining stock of a DM polybag set
> on clearance sale...).
My largest uniformed contingent is about 60 FK Bullet Helmed guys. :)
> Thus, as I see it, if I want to build an army worthy of
> (in-character) respect, I'm stuck with using the wizards
> and dragons as the main source of strength for my army.
That's fine by me. Armies vary considerably, in size and unit type. That is
the way it has always been.
Jeff
|
|
| |
In lugnet.castle, Jeff Johnston writes:
> In lugnet.castle, Franklin W. Cain writes:
>
> > Unfortunately, in the "army" (actually, population)
> > that I'm building, I've already got a dozen or so wizards,
> > most of them "bad guys", and I'm in the process of making
> > a few more.
>
> Remember that the chief goal of CW is for everyone to
> have fun, and while one person may have fun having an
> indestructible army of warrior-mages, it won't be fun
> for the people who have to deal with them.
Which is why people can turn down Battle requests and can come up with a
mutually beneficial outcome. :)
>
> So I personally don't think your cadre of wizards is a
> problem unless you want each of your wizards to also be
> the most powerful mages on the planet. This is especially
> true since your army has other weak points - it's size,
> for example.
I'd say the more wizards you have, the less powerful the average wizards are.
I would not bar powerful leader mages, though.
Jeff
|
|
| |
In lugnet.castle, Jeff Stembel writes:
> In lugnet.castle, Jeff Johnston writes:
> > In lugnet.castle, Franklin W. Cain writes:
> >
> > > Unfortunately, in the "army" (actually, population)
> > > that I'm building, I've already got a dozen or so wizards,
> > > most of them "bad guys", and I'm in the process of making
> > > a few more.
> >
> > Remember that the chief goal of CW is for everyone to
> > have fun, and while one person may have fun having an
> > indestructible army of warrior-mages, it won't be fun
> > for the people who have to deal with them.
>
> Which is why people can turn down Battle requests and can come up with a
> mutually beneficial outcome. :)
Yep.. I think this is probably the best thing about castle world... If I post
an army of 550,000 mephisto-equivalents all with dragon steeds and each with
his own magical mech and pistol, I'm still no more powerful than anyone else,
because all interactions are predetermined and mutually agreed on... And the
problem with having an army like that is that fewer people will WANT to bother
making a story against my army...
So really, you can post anything you want-- just don't make your army TOO
'powerful and indestructible' or nobody will want to interact... in your case,
(as is my understanding) a small army with a dozen wizards is kind of saying
that the wizards are counterbalancing the lack of raw manpower.. hence your
army is ROUGHLY the same in strength to another army thanks to the wizards...
> > So I personally don't think your cadre of wizards is a
> > problem unless you want each of your wizards to also be
> > the most powerful mages on the planet. This is especially
> > true since your army has other weak points - it's size,
> > for example.
>
> I'd say the more wizards you have, the less powerful the average wizards are.
> I would not bar powerful leader mages, though.
<reminice geek_factor='high'>
Reminds me of something I remember dealing with in my MUD programming days...
All the programmers all wanted their own ultimate demon or ultimately powerful
weapon or something, and it made the meaning of "ultimate" rather blahze. As I
recall we had HP a maximum of roughly 2 billion (your standard C signed
integer), which we (the admins) said that "you shouldn't use unless you really
really mean it". We ended up with about 15 different monsters who all had 2
billion HP, maximum speed, strength, etc.... it was kinda silly-- especially
when you consider that we had more 2 billion HP NPCs than >50 HP NPCs...
</reminice>
Anyway, I'd agree... in essence the more wizards you have, the weaker they
become, such that on the whole, your army remains roughly the same
toughness-wise...
DaveE
|
|
|
