Author Topic: Revising Warlock and Summoner  (Read 3879 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Elton Robb

  • Revered Elder
  • ***
  • Posts: 1,206
  • OIC Points +0/-0
  • Master of Atlantis
    • The Atlantis Blog
Revising Warlock and Summoner
« on: June 03, 2008, 11:16:11 AM »
I'm thinking about revising the Warlock by combining it with the summoner (both are found in the Channeling Companion).  While the Warlock is based on the Classic Witch idea as it stands, I think I'll combine both of them.

Personal Web Portfolio:
http://eltonatlantean.wix.com/portfolio
Deviant Art: http://atlantean6.deviantart.com/
Renderosity: http://www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/browse.php?user_id=561541

Offline Temujin

  • Seeker of Wisdom
  • **
  • Posts: 273
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Revising Warlock and Summoner
« Reply #1 on: June 03, 2008, 11:32:24 PM »
Imho, they're valuable as independent classes, however one major flaw of the Warlock that I found odd was the Transformations list which gives you natural weapon, you need to develop independent OBs for each of the type of attacks, at an insane cost in DP (Special Attacks iirc, whereas the Warlock has semi-decent costs for Martial arts), so everyone in my group who looked at the list agreed it was stupid for a Warlock to raise that particular base list.

Offline Rasyr-Mjolnir

  • Inactive
  • *
  • Posts: 0
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Revising Warlock and Summoner
« Reply #2 on: June 04, 2008, 05:35:22 AM »
Imho, they're valuable as independent classes, however one major flaw of the Warlock that I found odd was the Transformations list which gives you natural weapon, you need to develop independent OBs for each of the type of attacks, at an insane cost in DP (Special Attacks iirc, whereas the Warlock has semi-decent costs for Martial arts), so everyone in my group who looked at the list agreed it was stupid for a Warlock to raise that particular base list.

Note: In RM2/RMC, the skill "Spell Mastery" would be the skill used to determine the OB for those other attacks. At least that was the original intent of that skill....


Offline Temujin

  • Seeker of Wisdom
  • **
  • Posts: 273
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Revising Warlock and Summoner
« Reply #3 on: June 04, 2008, 10:36:00 AM »
Spell Mastery ???  Mind you, a much better idea than Special Attacks in the situation, a power manipulation would be more viable cost wise, but it also doesn't seem in line with what Spell mastery is supposed to do.  Is this consistent with the other pure and semi with natural attack spells needing to develop their OBs?  I know in RMFRP, most of these are developped with Martial arts as they are unarmed attacks, but a few exceptions like the Warlock use Special Attacks for some reason.

Offline Rasyr-Mjolnir

  • Inactive
  • *
  • Posts: 0
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Revising Warlock and Summoner
« Reply #4 on: June 04, 2008, 10:46:00 AM »
In RMFRP, Spell Mastery is much much different than it was originally intended. That one skill is a perfect and concrete example of power creep that hit RM over the course of the years...   ;D


Offline Joshua24601

  • Neophyte
  • *
  • Posts: 85
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Revising Warlock and Summoner
« Reply #5 on: June 04, 2008, 12:30:17 PM »
Would directed spells be more appropriate for controlling those warlock spell weapons?
Also, if you use the "special attacks" skill, I'd rule that you could generalize it to make it apply for all the weapons on the list...

I've actually looked at the list a number of times because I think it's rather neat, although I don't really think it fits with the Warlock... "I'm gonna hex people, manipulate your fate, magically attack your soul.... and then turn my arm into a snake and use it to bite you?!?!"...

I didn't even get the "Channeling" feel from the list.. it seems more like it should be an essence list to me...
The day that our schools are well funded and the Airforce has to hold a bake sale to buy a new bomber, will be a good day!

Offline markc

  • Elder Loremaster
  • ****
  • Posts: 10,697
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Revising Warlock and Summoner
« Reply #6 on: June 06, 2008, 12:43:18 AM »
 A thought I had about shape changing is that if it is a complete shape change then the PC's cost for abilities might change also in that form. And as everyone knows that you only have a limited amout of DP so it can be hard to have a bunch of different shapes to learn skills in.

MDC
Bacon Law: A book so good all PC's need to be recreated.
Rule #0: A GM has the right to change any rule in a book to fit their game.
Role Play not Roll Play.
Use a System to tell the story do not let the system play you.

Offline Joshua24601

  • Neophyte
  • *
  • Posts: 85
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Revising Warlock and Summoner
« Reply #7 on: June 06, 2008, 02:20:11 AM »
A thought I had about shape changing is that if it is a complete shape change then the PC's cost for abilities might change also in that form. And as everyone knows that you only have a limited amout of DP so it can be hard to have a bunch of different shapes to learn skills in.
MDC

There's a 'multiple personalities' flaw... it calls for separate character sheets for each 'personality' and tracking XP separately... though most changes on this list are fairly superficial, and not till high level can they be permanent.
The day that our schools are well funded and the Airforce has to hold a bake sale to buy a new bomber, will be a good day!

Offline Sho

  • Neophyte
  • *
  • Posts: 38
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Revising Warlock and Summoner
« Reply #8 on: June 06, 2008, 05:20:56 AM »
I don't think Spell Mastery is the right skill here at all. The Warlock transforms himself & make physical attacks, nothing related to SM skill. I like the way it is; hard? of course, the Warlock is a spell-caster.
RoleMaster 4life

Offline yammahoper

  • Sage
  • ****
  • Posts: 3,858
  • OIC Points +0/-0
  • Nothing to see here, move along.
Re: Revising Warlock and Summoner
« Reply #9 on: June 06, 2008, 10:48:15 AM »
Actually the Warlock is most effective when he transformed someone else and then his enhanced minion/altered animal defends him.

I have not bothered to read the RMSS version of the Warlock, but it sounds like his changeing spells only effect him now?

Too lazy to dig out the book... 8)

lynn
I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser gate. All those moments will be lost in time... like tears in rain... Time to die.

Offline Arioch

  • Navigator
  • ***
  • Posts: 1,903
  • OIC Points +0/-0
  • Blood & Souls for Arioch!
Re: Revising Warlock and Summoner
« Reply #10 on: June 06, 2008, 11:11:07 AM »
I have not bothered to read the RMSS version of the Warlock, but it sounds like his changeing spells only effect him now?

Yes, which is strange IMHO for a Essence/Channeling user...
I suppose a magician might, he admitted, but a gentleman never could.

Offline yammahoper

  • Sage
  • ****
  • Posts: 3,858
  • OIC Points +0/-0
  • Nothing to see here, move along.
Re: Revising Warlock and Summoner
« Reply #11 on: June 06, 2008, 11:35:41 AM »
I have not bothered to read the RMSS version of the Warlock, but it sounds like his changeing spells only effect him now?

Yes, which is strange IMHO for a Essence/Channeling user...

Then a Warlock should take "self to touch" talent.  I had a couple of Warlocks in my old RM2 games (and the second one was destroyed by having his reputation utterly detroyed by my cuning NPC's, making him powerless!  Very good memories there).  The cumlative effects of there transforms was formidable indeed.  Lots of AT 4 and AT 12 with everyone getting stat mods to St, Qu, Co and Ag.  That was a freaky party, but plane hopping adventures/adventurers tend to be freaky.

lynn
I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser gate. All those moments will be lost in time... like tears in rain... Time to die.