PreSLNES I: Masters of Ethereal

My suggested changes and comments. I sort of think LDi has a point (even though i want to play dark elves). I think these changes might go part of the way to solving the issues he suggests.

Racial Advantages

Different races provide different advantages to soldiers. Note: Your unit must always cost at least 2 gold, even with racial advantages.

High Men: Pikes/Polearms are 0 gold. Plate Armor is 8 gold. Combatant Mounts are 4 gold. Trained are 2 gold instead of four
Barbarians: Leather and Shield are 0 gold. Swords and Axes/Heavy Weapons are 0 gold.
High Elves: Skilled Magic is 8 gold. Short bows are 0 gold. Longbows are 0 gold.
(i actually think is very powerful- free bows all around? yes please.)
Dark Elves: Skilled Magic is 0 gold.
Dwarves: Axes/Heavy Weapons are 0 gold. Plate Armor is 4 gold. Elite units are 12 gold.
Goblins: Crossbows are 0 gold. Leather and Shield are 0 gold. Short Swords and Spears are 0 gold.
Frigging awesome. No complaints. In my opinion stronger than any other race.
Halflings: Netheryl is 20 gold. Units costing more than 20 gold train 1 turn faster.
Orcs: Flying Combatants are 16 gold. Chainmail is 4 gold. Conscripts are 0. Trained are 2.
Gnolls: Combatant Mounts are 0 gold. Axes/Heavy Weapons are 0 gold. Leather is zero.
Beastmen: Noncombatant Mounts are 0 gold. Skilled Magic is 8 gold.




Also:
I don't think it is a good idea to make a per turn mana cost on the maintenance of magic troops. I think the upfront costs is enough. Otherwise the world spells will just cease to be part of the game for dark elves and others with lots of magic troops. And that would be a shame.

@LDi: Dark Elves do not get discounted mana upkeep. That is where you are faltering. They still have to pay mana cost and upkeep. Once you realize that, all of your gripes about it will no longer be relevant.

Also, Netheryl is a light armor. Halflings not only get magic resistance, but half price for the best armor in the game. It ain't shabby, even if it is expensive.

Right, nothing prevents Barbarians from riding horses - but it costs them. That's the point. You can put anything you want on any of your units, but some races get cheaper this and that. So of course you can put anything on anything.

Dammit. Will you all stop telling me to be more creative? Look at Immac's FFHNESII, and see what I can do with ONE mage. I turned one CONTINENT into hell. And later on, I found some, say, issues, with wordings in some treaties to eventually provoke a war between former allies.
I would really appreciate it if people looked at my critics for what they are, namely critics to a system, and they stopped telling me how to behave. I am not trying to abuse the system myself. If I wanted to, I wouldn't be telling everyone where the system can be abused.
As I said in the first place, there's no reason to make lopsided rules and then trust people. Let's look for a moment. Arrors. 1000 per unit. So these are 10 times more numerous than a standard archer unit. For the same price. Sure, they'll be a pain to move etc, but with their price, they are worth 10 times the equivalent archery unit for the same price. I can agree that a single individual or a small commando has advantages over a big group or army, but when I see this and you tell me to trust people not to metagame, sorry, I can't. The first player to design a unit made it 10 times more powerful than its equivalent, for essentially the same price, and to fill the same role.

Click to expand...

First of all, don't get too offended. I am of course always happy to have your input and I don't mean any insult to you, and I'm sure Vertinari didn't either. It is just frustrating coming up with a system, spending time on it, and it not quite getting through completely.

Let me explain a bit. In your belief, the system is lopsided for a few reasons: 1. Numbers, 2. Prices. As you mentioned in your last post, to you Numbers = Power, or Prices = Power. This just isn't the case. This is a fantasy game, remember. So numbers in the 1,000 or 2,000 can of course be slaughtered by 100 or 200 men who are better trained, equipped, and ordered. I want to again mention the Riders of Rohan here, who were consistently capable of immense feats of glory against massive numbers. The best indication of a unit's abilities it its Quality, obviously. I would understand if I gave races bonuses to Quality (made Quality cheaper for some races) - but I have not done that. Quality is an extremely important trait, and there is a clear reason why I have not discounted it for any race. The rest is both: 1. Functional and 2. Descriptive. Function operates in the sense that we, as players, know what your unit is equipped with and why and what good that will do - the trait serves a clear purpose (i.e., give armor, give movement, give magic, etc.). Descriptive operates in that we can write about that and we can interact with that information in a more detailed manner.

I am a sneaky GM. This is true, and you will see it. For example, I believe it was you who posted the unit the Bard, which has 60 in expert magic, and then 4 Quality. That is an extremely low-quality unit. You might not realize it, because they have expert magic - but imagine a flame that is out of control and cannot be completely tamed or put out. That is, essentially, Expert Magic with a simply Trained unit. Powerful magic running in their blood or studied, but such a poor understanding of how to control or discipline it according to their training in your army.

The point I am getting at is this: I have gone over these rules many times. I understand that some people here think they are unbalanced, and I am willing to always discuss that. But I would also like people to have good faith in me. This is not a Tabletop game. Remember that we can have all the rules we want, but the meat of the game will be in what is written in your orders to me via PM before every update. If you are full of , basic ideas - you will fail. If you are full of innovation, you will succeed. I don't care how good a writer someone is, but moreso I care if they can direct their kingdom in a unique way and approach situations with a degree of fantastical prowess.

So for everything that might be imbalanced, there are other players who would say, "Hey, wait, I can use that for this reason actually..."

This isn't a simple tabletop game, move Army X to Location Y, attack, run away, etc. It is High Fantasy Epic. And for others who are writing about my rules, and then not even playing - well, I mean, it is certainly helpful. But I almost feel you aren't playing because the rules aren't exactly to your liking. If I change them to your liking, then a couple other players won't like those changes. You can't please everyone, and it would be a lot more showing of your interest in a fantasy epic game to join even if the rules aren't so amazingly perfect to you. But I am not ignorant and I know that "holes in a system" remain only so deep because we have a whole story/order/update element to this game that you cannot even put numbers onto... but only imagination and intelligence.

I have a way I GM, and I have a way I make my rules. I think in something called a "Never Ending Story" it is pointless to make rules uber-specific. I think I have achieved somewhat of a balance here.

Think of it as tips on how to play well in my NES for everyone. I'm not going to hand everything to everyone so easily or roll over like a puppy because a bunch of Dark Elves have Skilled Magic (and are still paying mana for it, by the way). Stupid decisions get stupid results, no matter how powerful your army is. Even history tells us this important lesson.

@LDi: Again I appreciate your input and I am sorry to frustrate you by saying the word "Creative" so much. I have no doubt you are a creative individual, but I was just trying to better describe my vision.

Immaculate said:

My suggested changes and comments. I sort of think LDi has a point (even though i want to play dark elves). I think these changes might go part of the way to solving the issues he suggests.

Racial Advantages

Different races provide different advantages to soldiers. Note: Your unit must always cost at least 2 gold, even with racial advantages.

High Men: Pikes/Polearms are 0 gold. Plate Armor is 8 gold. Combatant Mounts are 4 gold. Trained are 2 gold instead of four
Barbarians: Leather and Shield are 0 gold. Swords and Axes/Heavy Weapons are 0 gold.
High Elves: Skilled Magic is 8 gold. Short bows are 0 gold. Longbows are 0 gold.
(i actually think is very powerful- free bows all around? yes please.)
Dark Elves: Skilled Magic is 0 gold.
Dwarves: Axes/Heavy Weapons are 0 gold. Plate Armor is 4 gold. Elite units are 12 gold.
Goblins: Crossbows are 0 gold. Leather and Shield are 0 gold. Short Swords and Spears are 0 gold.
Frigging awesome. No complaints. In my opinion stronger than any other race.
Halflings: Netheryl is 20 gold. Units costing more than 20 gold train 1 turn faster.
Orcs: Flying Combatants are 16 gold. Chainmail is 4 gold. Conscripts are 0. Trained are 2.
Gnolls: Combatant Mounts are 0 gold. Axes/Heavy Weapons are 0 gold. Leather is zero.
Beastmen: Noncombatant Mounts are 0 gold. Skilled Magic is 8 gold.

Click to expand...

Immaculate: As Dark Elves, your units must pay mana upkeep and costs if you attach the Skilled Magic to them. Remember that.

A few things in your changes:

1. No point for Elves to have free short bows. Might as well just give them Longbows, right?

2. I am in no way willing to give racial advantages to Quality. That is the one area I didn't want to touch, because I want all races equally capable of coming up with shabby piss-poor conscripts and really elite units, for the same prices.

3. Gnolls are already really powerful. Heavy weapon, high movement.

4. Halflings training faster is an interesting concept... I will admit that.

5. I think Dwarves are powerful as-is, too. They are strong and can carry Plate Mail like its leather.

okay.

(Point 1: it was for mounted units so they got bows too)

Immaculate said:

okay.

(Point 1: it was for mounted units so they got bows too)

Click to expand...

Ah, I see. Well I think it is acceptable for Elves to carry Longbows on their mounts, too.

Here. This is what I did, everyone. I hope it makes some of you happy. I added little descriptions to explain my reasons behind the advantages:

Mana Storing:



ALSO, please change your profiles for this section:

Mana (per turn / crystals): Current amount of mana generated per turn from mana centers / Amount of mana you have collected in your Citadel in converted Crystal form. Every Wizard begins with 100 mana crystals stored within their Citadel. Every Citadel generates 50 mana per turn.

Click to expand...

Starlife said:

I am a sneaky GM. This is true, and you will see it. For example, I believe it was you who posted the unit the Bard, which has 60 in expert magic, and then 4 Quality. That is an extremely low-quality unit. You might not realize it, because they have expert magic - but imagine a flame that is out of control and cannot be completely tamed or put out. That is, essentially, Expert Magic with a simply Trained unit. Powerful magic running in their blood or studied, but such a poor understanding of how to control or discipline it according to their training in your army.

Click to expand...

Ok, that's probably my whole issue here.
You are asking us to design units with some bits that are described by figures, and we have to assign them a cost. What I want is a unit that turns noncombatants into expert fighters. It's vulnerable, being a single individual. Since I believe the effect to be powerful, I put it expert magic. The mana upkeep for it is quite weird given the description, but it's not an issue if it fosters game balance. Now the quality itself is not explained. So you just tell me now that, oh, by the way, even though it's trained, it will be quite ineffective. So I'd be much better off, gold-wise, and gold-wise implies number of turns before unit is available (which is a great idea by the way), to increase its quality and lower its magic. Ultimately, for the same price, I'd get a group of units
that are more reliable (quality), affect rouhgly the same area (number of units compensating expertise in magic), and can be recruited faster. So numbers DO count.
I think it would be better if you just asked people to design units and set the prices yourself based on the description and what the player wants to achieve with the unit, because your stats are not necessarily clear. The reason I put a relatively low quality on the unit is that he is a warrior and a bard, but as a warrior, without magic, he kinda sucks. His magic is also extremely limited. It wouldn't be difficult to define a less vulnerable (say 5-6 individuals) magic unit with expert magic that has a much broader range.
Regarding spells, this is even more true. The description of an effect ass 'wondrous' is vague at best. If I want a specific effect and can't get it because I didn't guess correctly what your adjectives ment, that'll just sink whatever strategy I could have though of.

And I know numbers < quality. You don't even need fantasy settings for that. Normands took Sicily with a handful of knights against hundreds of saracens. And the Spanish conquered two empires with handfuls of men (and a few horses).

Furthermore, if numbers are not an issue, then why do you ask this:

@Omega: They look good, but Wyvern Riders by default come with 5 riders. Wyverns are basically smaller dragons, but they are still incredibly powerful. 5 can easily slaughter and cover a wide range. 100 is a lot of Wyverns.

Click to expand...

As for feeling offended, when in the same rebuttal I get this:

a standard battle model used for hundreds of years

Click to expand...

and

be more creative

Click to expand...

, then yes, I have an issue: I'm being said in the same post that I should be using standard models and be more creative at once.

Ok, that's probably my whole issue here.
You are asking us to design units with some bits that are described by figures, and we have to assign them a cost. What I want is a unit that turns noncombatants into expert fighters. It's vulnerable, being a single individual. Since I believe the effect to be powerful, I put it expert magic. The mana upkeep for it is quite weird given the description, but it's not an issue if it fosters game balance. Now the quality itself is not explained. So you just tell me now that, oh, by the way, even though it's trained, it will be quite ineffective. So I'd be much better off, gold-wise, and gold-wise implies number of turns before unit is available (which is a great idea by the way), to increase its quality and lower its magic. Ultimately, for the same price, I'd get a group of units
that are more reliable (quality), affect rouhgly the same area (number of units compensating expertise in magic), and can be recruited faster. So numbers DO count.
I think it would be better if you just asked people to design units and set the prices yourself based on the description and what the player wants to achieve with the unit, because your stats are not necessarily clear. The reason I put a relatively low quality on the unit is that he is a warrior and a bard, but as a warrior, without magic, he kinda sucks. His magic is also extremely limited. It wouldn't be difficult to define a less vulnerable (say 5-6 individuals) magic unit with expert magic that has a much broader range.
Regarding spells, this is even more true. The description of an effect ass 'wondrous' is vague at best. If I want a specific effect and can't get it because I didn't guess correctly what your adjectives ment, that'll just sink whatever strategy I could have though of.

And I know numbers < quality. You don't even need fantasy settings for that. Normands took Sicily with a handful of knights against hundreds of saracens. And the Spanish conquered two empires with handfuls of men (and a few horses).

Click to expand...

You still aren't getting the point. I am not telling you that your Bard will be ineffective. It will be extremely effective, and it will have expert magic, as you have indicated. What I am saying is that by it being Trained and not Elite or anything, that it could be unexpected consequences. Overall, that unit is extremely powerful of course, and it will have great purpose - and it is a single character-based unit, which I find to be a great advantage. But by saying I am a sneaky GM, I mean that I might say that something your Bard did had unintended consequences. I'm not going to be a jerk, though. Sneaky does not = jerk. It just means I might be a bit challenging. And not only to you, but to every one, of course. Your Bard is an excellent unit and I like your design, don't get me wrong. It will do well, but what I am saying is that the Magic there will not necessarily be the most disciplined control in a military environment (That is typically what Quality represents). So if someone designed the same unit, but made it Elite, it would have a completely different effect. But don't worry. Your Bard unit is great. I was using that as an example moreso than anything else.

LDi: I think what Vertinari meant is that we can be creative with the more obscure units, but think of High Men armies as being well-rounded and fairly traditional. But of course it depends on what a player wants to design and how they want to do it.

EDIT: Also, why I pointed out to Omega about the Wyvern Riders, is that I had made the Wyvern Riders the game's default unit. It is the default unit for Orcs, and in the default description I wrote 5 Wyvern Riders. That was not a unique unit to him, that was the default unit I made. If he had made his own version and said 100 riders, then fine, I would have accepted it - because he would have provided a description saying, "These wyverns are more numerous... blah blah blah." But for the default unit, I wrote 5, so players must abide to the default unit restrictions.

I don't see the problem of just making every unit have 100 soldiers. Its standard, and will prevent these stupid arguments.

Damn. Half of your ideas were part of my intended potential post-WWI Magitek NES.

@Sonereal:

Knights of Faraday
20 Knights
Elite (16)
Heavy Weapons (0)
Swords (0)
Plate Armor (16)
Combatant Mount (12)
Weak Magic: (8)

Knights of Faraday are fast moving, heavily armored, elite troops meant to punch holes in a line. They have been granted some magical ability from Faraday himself in the form of a small area-of-effect, passive ability around them that increases terror in enemy troops surrounding them. Because of this, even if the Knights are tangled up in the line they're punching, there's still a chance some troops will simply flee from combat in sheer terror.

Cost/Maintenance: 52/26
8/8 Mana

Click to expand...

Your Mana maintenance on these knights would only be 4 per turn.

Omega124 said:

I don't see the problem of just making every unit have 100 soldiers. Its standard, and will prevent these stupid arguments.

Click to expand...

No one else seems to have a problem, and it seems that LDi actually agrees with the fact that 1,000 men can die by the hands of 100. Having some units with 1 strong character, some with 5, some with 500, some with 1,000 is something unique to units, I feel like.

People just need to trust me. From what I have read so far of what people have posted, I have not found a problem in the numbers. I am looking at everything, and approving everything. Remember that new spells and new units must be approved by me before you can use them.

I am mostly looking at numbers that go anywhere above 200. When I see that, I get suspicious - but the ones I have seen are okay to me, as the mod of this game.

Starlife said:

@Sonereal:
Your Mana maintenance on these knights would only be 4 per turn.

Click to expand...

Will fix.

about unit sizes - My idea:
10 soldiers - 0.1 multiplier (or 0.1)
50 soldiers - 0.7 multiplier (or 0.5)
100 soldiers - 1.5 multiplier (or 1.0)
200 soldiers - 3 multiplier (or 2.0)
etc.

So UnitTotalCost*multiplier. This would give us/others some sense in how large is the unit you are training. More soldiers you have to recruit train, equip, more expensiver it is and more upkeep they demand. It's quite a bit easier to recruit, train and equip 50 elite soldiers than 200 elite soldiers. This would also allow to create small assassin units or large infantry armies. But it is just an idea.

-------------------------------------------------
Clan-union "Rage"(Wizard has no known name)/ Northen Wolf
Race: Goblin
Citadel: Hatred
Government: War Council of Elders
Spellbook:



Mana: 50/100
Gold (per turn / coffers)
Castles: 0
Cities:
Towns:
Units:

Hey Northen Wolf. Thanks for the idea, but if the player describes those 50 Elite soldiers and the other player describes their 200 Elite soldiers, then they are inherently different. I think sizes should just be approved by me. Numbers do not equal success by any means... It is more expensive to equip more men in theory, but if the men being equipped are a small, elite force, the price might show that as well (so equipping numerous men isn't the only cost).

Onto your profile. That spell is extremely inventive and I like it. I would ask a favor of you, which is to add the upkeep of your units underneath the cost (or next to it).

Also, your Expert Magic trait costs 60 gold AND 60 mana to purchase, and 30 gold and 30 mana to maintain. Please mark the maintenance of both gold and mana.

Other than that, I like it and I am happy to have goblins aboard.

Oh and your sizes are fine. Honestly, it is however you want to play it.

I've decided to delete a very long post and say only this. Starlife is, from the way he has responded so far, a far better mod than I think anyone has quite realised, who is more than happy to exert time and effort keeping the game balanced and enjoyable. LDi I appreciate your criticisms and your anger and I did not mean to insult you. As Starlife says I meant that the High Men and Barbarians will play, at first, somewhat more like real life armies and are perfectly suited to be enemies of one and other. When I say creative I mean look at the words and the story and IGNORE the numbers. The numbers are merely a way of costing a unit and judging how long a unit takes to train. What you get at the end depends upon the words you choose to use and the description you give and the quality of your orders. To counter pikemen use heavy infantry, which you can also train. When the barbarians counter with axmen, rip 'em to shreds with cavalry. Let your mind run wild with possibilities. If any NES, other than a boardgame NES, is solely based on number crunching, it is no longer a NES by definition. If you are looking for a NES of more numbers and less words this NES will not suit you.

I can only say I am sorry if this post causes offensive or any prior posts have. It is not my intention. I have rewritten this post several times and am not being as frank as I would like to be. Please either sit back and enjoy the story and learn to trust the other players, something Immac's NESes do not foster I think (certainly I have noticed that players from Immac's NESes tend to be far more cut-throat than other NESers, not a criticism merely observation), and trust the mod. Or I would suggest that you consider whether this NES is right for you as a player. Again not a criticism but a suggestion as all players are different. Some, such as myself, prefer a free-for-all with words and not worrying overly about numbers. Others prefer hard stats and less words. It is one of the reasons I avoid the heavier historical NESes like the plague and LOVE DaftNESes.

Thanks for these words, Vertinari. It is a good assessment of what I have in mind for this NES. To me, the three words "Never Ending Story" inherently mean something different than a board game or tabletop game. There is an element here that cannot be put in rules as clear-cut bullet points. That element is a player's imagination. I am a fair GM. I don't really care what people here have done in past NESes or how they have done it. This NES might seem different, because I am different from those GMs. I feel that I have attempted a healthy balance of preventing god-playing, but still having flexibility and creativity. I haven't listed all the units possible, and I have given players the opportunity to invent their own kingdoms and Wizards. I have appreciated all of the advice players here have given in the creation of this NES. Without our discussions in the ideas thread, this NES wouldn't be possible. I am an open-minded individual who wants to host a fun and inspiring game. This game won't be about how well you can screw over your neighbors. There is competition for gold and mana, yes, but it is also about creating your kingdom from scratch and maintaining it in a fantasy world. It is an epic fantasy game, as I have said. A healthy competition in the game is fine, but please acknowledge that we are all writing the story together. If you're joining this game to attempt to screw over everyone involved with it and recklessly ignore the fantastical nature of Ethereal, then as Vertinari said, this game isn't for you.

Your first and foremost goal should be establishing a fantasy kingdom. This of course involves competition with players. It will involve war with players. But if your sole reason for joining is to just to prove how well you can outsmart everyone else, then you might not have a good time.

What I haven't enjoyed is that people seem to think the rules should be 100% how they want them, or they won't even consider joining. They comment in this thread, but then have no actual interest to join because one small detail was not to their liking (yet if that detail were to be changed, it would alienate other players). It's like there isn't even a consideration as to how something could work if it is just different or isn't exactly how the player feels it should be. Isn't that the fun of playing a game with other people? How it is so unpredictable and how it encourages players to be inventive?

I highly respect NESes of all kinds. But look at the Settlements area, for example. You will see that I don't list city improvements like this is Civ or something. No. Instead I say, spend your gold how you wish to improve your kingdom. I leave it open.

I edited my wizard post to add the spell description. If it's too vague/wide, I can restrict it a bit. The idea is to make a 'creature', the exact nature of which may vary, but if it must be always the same kind, then it can be altered to create always, say, a woman rather than a woman or a stag depending on the caster's intent. The goal remains to bewitch someone through a magical creature.

LDiCesare said:

I edited my wizard post to add the spell description. If it's too vague/wide, I can restrict it a bit. The idea is to make a 'creature', the exact nature of which may vary, but if it must be always the same kind, then it can be altered to create always, say, a woman rather than a woman or a stag depending on the caster's intent. The goal remains to bewitch someone through a magical creature.

Click to expand...

It's perfect. It is a remarkable idea and I am looking forward to seeing it in play.

Vertinari118 said:

I can only say I am sorry if this post causes offensive or any prior posts have. It is not my intention. I have rewritten this post several times and am not being as frank as I would like to be. Please either sit back and enjoy the story and learn to trust the other players, something Immac's NESes do not foster I think

Click to expand...

No problem. I haven't played only in Immac's NESes, though. They just happen to be those which lasted (except for TheJopa's NES and mine, all the other NESes I joined were too short-lived to even have actual player interaction).
If I ask and comment a lot, it is because:
1) I don't join anything lightly. I want rules to be clear (not to be mine, but be clear) and most importantly consistent.
2) My job and studies make me look at systems and look for bugs and loopholes. So presented with a system, I simply tend to analyse it.

Okay, here is a little map sample I put together. This is only a fraction of what will be revealed to players at the beginning of the game - so don't worry - you are not all making claims on this tiny area! This is just a sample. I wanted to show you all what it will look like.

Intentionally missing are:
- Mana Centers
- Settlements

Which won't be revealed until after starting point claims are made.