Mages and You

[Pixie]

:/

[Dice]

I'm not trying to attack you - more trying to explain how what happened shouldn't be used as an excuse to criticize players but as a demonstration of some reasons why I think you didn't get the outcome you wanted, and the sort of decisions that I think could be made differently in the future. I think RP is honestly better with OOC cooperation between "good guys" and "bad guys" and generally I'm more than happy to offer it - IF it 1) makes sense to me and 2) can be achieved in a way where it's not massively detrimental to the involved PCs.

I do want to stick to my guns in saying that accommodation of the 'letting someone escape' sort shouldn't be expected as a matter of course and players shouldn't be criticized for not offering it, though. That's not cool.

[Voxumo]

No one is saying it should be expected, but it is something that should be considered.

[Geras]

I don't think it's much from on the lawful side to have to pull your punches for the sake of RP. I'd rather just have the mages have better tools at secrecy and deception.

[Dice]

Pulling your punches can actually be very fun, though, and it's a good way to keep from getting too invested.

I think we really can/do sometimes end up with a situation where Order/Knight/Reeve players DO feel they have to catch all the bad guys or they're 'losing' - so making an active commitment to letting somebody escape on the OOC level, now and again, is a good reminder that it really isn't necessarily so. In general, arranging for character 'failure' now and again helps you separate IC and OOC.

On a related note, too, if the "good guys" are too gung-ho, chasing down every single tiny lead to criminal, heretical, or magical behavior, then the theme really suffers. People become unwilling to take any risks at all, and conflict RP is stifled. The sweet spot, I think, lies in doing your character's job, but not going out of your way to pursue leads unless/until they become something you absolutely cannot avoid. I.e., don't be the Inquisitor who goes and sits in taverns making lists of anybody who says the slightest suspicious thing; be the Inquisitor who eagerly follows up on reports from other PCs of concrete action.

Establishing this 'zone of tolerance' is another way to meet people halfway while not having to play an incompetent PC. In a world like TI's, after all, manpower and resources are a serious concern - that's why free guild RPA is limited, to illustrate the fact it should be flat-out impossible to go chasing every single lead. (I like this more than "corrupt" good guys - from my perception we've actually had more corrupt Inquisitors than straight-up devoted Inquisitors, and that gets old.)

Really, I don't disagree with Vox on the big stuff. I think we'd all be happier, healthier players if we were open to more OOC negotiation over the terms of RP - so long as that OOC negotiation is done right and comes from a place of wanting better story. I just think we need to be careful about not insulting players who choose not to make their character take a fall, and I think we need to encourage mages to use the formidable tools they DO have in a sneakier, subtler way.

There are amazing spells that allow amazing things, including a lot of changes since you last actively played a mage, Geras. They just don't typically allow for toe-to-toe confrontations with massed crowds. And that's honestly something I like, whatever side of the 'battle' I'm on! I like the idea that mage strength lies not in open confrontation but in stealth, planning, etc. That just makes sense with the theme the way it is.

[Voxumo]

There is one thing I would like to counter the 'spells shouldn't allow for toe-to-toe confrontation'. Yes many spells in a mage's arsenal are more subtle and sneakier, but they are also incredibly distanced spells. In the last day I saw a mage who magically put an item on the Justiciar, and who was using some void spell, can't remember the name right now, to just generally torment them. It ultimately created a surprisingly large scene, about 5 people, and lasted for longer than I personally know since I had to leave... but the problem is how is the mage suppose to benefit from that rp they just created? They can't really be in that scene without making it obvious it was them, so they are technically losing out on rp they created, and the xp that goes with it.

I'm not saying the sneakier spells aren't a good thing, but before people go throwing them out there as a solution, it should be considered that the mage likely won't be directly benefiting from the rp that was created via those spells. It's once again a matter of 'Mages creating mage-related rp for others'. But also don't get me wrong, there are a few spells out there who thankfully don't point fingers at the caster, but can be done without a visible invocation. For example, Glamour, I loved that spell because I could use it to target vain people, and actually be present to see the results. Nothing bothered me more than the little voice in the back of my head going 'Did anyone actually acknowledge the spell?" when I casted spells from a distance.

[Dice]

They might be losing out on the XP, but there are so many other benefits from the RP! I remember Aelisra sending a body to the Grand Inquisitor with that same spell. She might not have gotten to be a part of the scene, but there's no denying she benefited tremendously from pulling off such an awesome stunt! There are also other benefits to pretty much all distance spells, and quite a lot of in-room harassment spells that aren't obvious, like your example of Glamour. The tools are out there, I really honestly think so!

[Voxumo]

How did she benefit from pulling off the stunt? Recommends or just the furthering of her own story?
Also as for in-room harassment spells that aren't obvious... I can only think of a few, based just on the elements I've played. Void I think has two and that's even stretching my memory, not including auspex which is a non-visible invocation, Air has Glamour and I'm not immediately remembering any other, and Water... it has been awhile since I played Water, aka Seymour, but I think they maybe had two, 3 if you count one that wasn't really harassment but required you to be in the same room and was non-visible.

Of course I can't speak for fire and earth... they could have load of these types of spells and I wouldn't know. And I may also be mis-remembering the above, since my memory isn't always that good.

[Geras]

There's definitely some nice tools in a mage's tool box already. I'd add the shadow spell as one of my own personal favourites. It'd always be nice to have more tools of course.

Any spell that can be cast remotely/discretely is naturally limited in scope for reasons of balance though - and I don't think there's anything wrong with that. For more impactful spells you need to be physically vulnerable, and rightly so.

What I'm suggesting is more tools to conceal your identity while in the vulnerable state (ie a magecrafted apple that becomes an apple mask or something) or that help you escape to safety if you survived that period of vulnerability (Brenarly's Key does this well for example).