Fate Seers

Hey Staffers,

So I'm planning on playing a Fate Seer at the upcoming event and am quite excited about the class--and thanks for getting the spells up!  

Not to complain, but rather give some PC feedback and perhaps get an open convo about this going, I also read how you were looking to likely up the XP costs for the Spells.   Having just written up my character, if anything, I would recommend lowering the XP costs for the Spells.  I'm going to be able to cast two spells per period, and that's only because I attended the Beta event and made donations for SP.  Otherwise, I might have one.

A few considerations as to why:
-Fate Seers get no weapon on their path, meaning that pretty much everyone is going to need to buy one from the Common Path (larping without a weapon skill is never fun...) where they cost a lot. Sure, I'm dropping almost 600 to get large, but they're all very costly.
-Fate Seers don't need to purchase their spells, true, but this is offset that you need at least 2 throw-away speedbump skills that literally do nothing just to be able to buy your first spell slot.  This gives it more than enough balance for the XP costs now set.
-Even by level 10, you're still going to have only one real pursuit (which, I suppose, may be the intent): casting wands, or cups, or swords.  Now, if you want it to be a specialized sub-type that makes sense, but to have a chance to cast and entire deck is almost mathematically impossible.
-To be able to use a single spell from each of the 3 Courts of Suit requires a staggering 7 prerequisites, four of which again literally do nothing at all.
-Since the majority of spells are located on Sorcerer and/or Elementalist, mathematically both Sorc and Element are far cheaper options to do almost the same things--and they get to deliberately choose the spells they can use.

As I said, I do not mean to make this sound like I'm complaining in any way whatsoever.  All I'm saying is that having done the math (I was going to go Sorcerer, but I like the FS fluff way better), they're still the most costly, especially in the long-run.  

Before you up the price, please write up some different level character templates.  I think you'll see what I mean.

Most importantly, a new character playing a FS will have at most 1 spell to cast their first event.  This is going to prove a huge deterrent, leading to most opting for Sorc or Element down the road.  
With class mods existing and being of importance, I'd hate to see this deterrent occur (selfishly, of course).

If however you get inundated with FS's, I will totally apologize and change my mind about upping the point costs.  But as it stands, I think the costs are high enough as they are that they may discourage new players starting with 1200 XP to spend from going FS...

Thanks,
-Ron

First a clarification, the Fate Seer spells do not cost XP to purchase, unlike other casters. So the XP increase will be for the Spell Slots. I can tell you understood but we want to make sure others reading this understand too.

the reason for the cost increase will be because aside from some basics, they will not be using XP at the same rate as other classes. To keep all player progressions at about the same level, we are considering raising the Spell slot costs.

That being said, you make some very good points and we will consider those in our decision.

Although not fate seer specific it was brought up in the OP so I would like to comment.

I whole heartedly agree that fighting without a weapon style is seriously not fun.

So most people will go for a weapon style. In most LARPs "casters" at least get access to staff and small weapon as they are usually referred to. I love that you guys did "Spheres" and that someone who wants to be a staff fighter can use Large sphere and do four damage with it and not be worthless.

That being said, there is no "cheap" defensive weapon, or a quick grab like small weapon so you at least have something to hold onto or something to strike with when you run out of spells, even if you aren't very efficient with it.

In the end without weapon skills or profs no caster will ever be too dangerous with a weapon in their hands.

Large weapons are amazing, so getting access to those as a caster should be relatively difficult.

My suggestion would be to lower the cost of medium on the common list, and remove small from the common list and actually put it on everyones list.

Also, for simplicity sake I think if you possess the skill florentine, it should make your small weapon sphere do 3 damage instead of two. Calling uneven damage is super annoying.

As far as weapons open to the general public, I want to point something else out. Shield is not on the common list, but Large and Ranged are.

It is so much more difficult to learn to fight with a bow, throwing weapons, or Claymore than it is to block with a shield. I understand from a balance stand point you may not want everyone getting a shield. But if you put the cost up there, something like that of Str +1, I think it would balance itself out just fine.

I feel bad for kind of hi jacking this thread, but the OP made a point that effects all the casters. ZERO weapon skills at all on a casting list simply is no fun, and for how expensive spells are to learn, and how few spell slots you can start with, you almost NEED a back up weapon.

If you are a 5 BP caster without armor, and a someone comes at you with a two hander swinging 4's, what real chance do you have?

YOu either have no weapon and you will get mowed down, or you spent so much of your experience on your weapon that you have no spells and you are just delaying the inevitable.

Making basic weapon fighting styles more available will not upset the balance, but it will make the game a lot more fun for a lot more people.

I agree, particularly with the additions of Shield to the Common List and Small Weapon to the 'caster' lists. Charge a lot for them--but make them accessible if the PC really really wants them.

The fact that casters get weapon buffs to increase or alter the type of damage, but no weapon sphere whatsoever, creates a bit of a schism in the character creation.

And yes, getting back to the original point, FS's don't need to spend XP on their spells, but they do have to buy the three Aces (of Wands, Cups and Swords): a prerequisite Sorc's and Elements don't need. Factor in the randomness of getting stuck with the spells you find, as opposed to choosing the spells you want, and it really does balance.

And btw: thanks again for listening to and considering your PC's feedback guys...

Tybalt wrote:
And btw: thanks again for listening to and considering your PC's feedback guys...

I want to second this, Ive already seen things changed based off feedback I gave through emails and such. It was fast too.

Ok first a clarification, Staff is an exception and is listed as a Medium Sphere weapon doing 2 damage.

It is our feeling that casters cast. that is their primary focus. If a players wishes to arm themselves then the options are available to them. Casters start with a slower progression but have the potential to grow in power well beyond the potential of the majority of melee classes. If you wish to delay that progression by learning a weapon sphere. That option is made available to you.

Lastly, let me make something clear that I'm hearing and want to make sure players understand. (I am also going to post this elsewhere.) As a caster, you only pay the Spell XP cost once to learn it. After that you may cast it as many times as you have the appropriate spell slot. So you do not have to purchase the spell slot and the spell for every spell you cast.

I don't know if that helps "lower the cost" of being a caster but I wanted to make sure that everyone understands how it works.

If staves do less damage than regular medium sphere weapons, they really shouldn't cost the same.

I would put staff on the caster list, make it only that weapon, and make it a bit cheaper than getting it off the common list.

My question is, if you make a staff phys rep long enough to be in the large weapon category and wield it as such does it still only do 2 damage? If it does, id like you to go watch "The Forbidden Kingdom" and see what Jet Li and Jacky Chan have to say about that =)

I see what you're saying about the cost to learn a spell, but the Spell Slot XP costs are what really matters. Learning a spell is a one-time purchase, and yeah, that could add up, but once you've got it you're done. FS get their "rank 1" spell slots at about 220 each, compared to the 75 for a Sorc. That may not seem like a big difference, but consider this for a lv 10 character...

Plus, with Courts at 509 and Major Arc's at 728, that is severely going to limit the casting power of even the highest level FS. That's why upping it seemed such a concern, and why I started this thread.

And not to be difficult but for the sake of conversation:

It is our feeling that casters cast. that is their primary focus. If a players wishes to arm themselves then the options are available to them. Casters start with a slower progression but have the potential to grow in power well beyond the potential of the majority of melee classes. If you wish to delay that progression by learning a weapon sphere. That option is made available to you. wrote:

Then why does every caster class get access to multiple weapon buffs...?

The matter is being discussed and we will take your, and all our players' concerns into consideration when we make our final decision.

Staff is on the medium weapon sphere (despite it's size) because we feel it is a weapon that should do about the same damage in-game as a average sword, not a battle axe or Polearm. The Max length for Staff has already been upped to 50" and at that length the damage is 3.

While i do respect and understand the need for game balance, but i feel that 50" is still too short. It's also hard to find LARP staves that short. (the shortest i could find online is 60") At 4ft, 2in that's basically a walking stick in my opinion.

I will take another look.