Tuujaimaa

Arena Chat Thread

<Snipped quote by Tuujaimaa>

Hilarious

Do you insult everyone who has something better to do than debate text combat on the internet?

;)

@MelonHead

Yes. If you remove all but the first four words in that sentence it's still accurate. :D

However,

Walking away from a debate rather than actually countering the points is poor form. If you're on this thread it's a given that you care about combat at least a little. If you care about combat at least a little, then you should continue the debate regardless. :P

Still - if you have a preset view on combat that you aren't willing to change... Not much we can do about it.

Arena Chat Thread

You hardly need to write up a new system.

The creation of spaghetti would not in and of itself cause any real issues. It's the same very basic level as creation of elemental matter.

Arena Chat Thread

Basic magical theory is as follows:

Magic is the use of mana or other energies (as appropriate) to achieve lasting effects. This can be as simple as transforming mana, a highly malleable energy, into another kind of energy (e.g. Kinetic, Heat, Electrical) or as complex as creating portals between realms.

The inherent need to justify use of magic exists because "I say so because magic" doesn't mesh well with the inherent logic required of combat - strict adherence to time, to detail, and battle strategy are all essential for a good combatant, and each of these things requires use of logic in one form or another.

The need to justify is not, however, as deep as advanced physics. Even a rudimentary explanation to justify the mechanics of the spell on a very simple level are fine - and certain types of magic (e.g. Elemental magic) have inbuilt rules that allow them to be used without such justification (as such justifications are considered a priori).

If you use elemental magic on a highly complex level, you would be expected to justify the complexity as necessary, however.

Now, the justification becomes more important when you are using magic that is more complex than using the basic rules. As long as you have a mundane rationalisation for how the spell works, it should be fine. Certain actions are taken to be inherently known (e.g. Creating a portal), but will again require additional rationalisation based upon the complexity of the magic being used.

Provided that you think of magic as an advanced and highly malleable energy, this system is very easy to follow and makes a lot of sense. Justifying things as "because Magic" does not make a lot of sense and is inherently unsatisfying to deal with.

Arena Chat Thread

<Snipped quote by Tuujaimaa>

I need to go re-write a few of my characters quick, could you explain how you convert mana/energy into magical spells for me? Because I must have missed my class on magic and the supernatural.

I'm going to go do something else now, because this discussion is becoming permeated by the nonsensical.

@MelonHead

In my experience, leaving when you encounter resistance is the sign of a poor debater and a poor combatant.

Arena Chat Thread

<Snipped quote by Innue>

That's usually just people not thinking through their characters particularly well. Even my relatively low tier characters have reaction speeds many times faster than a human, effectively reducing the 'max speed' of things around them by the same margin. If you forget to do that then you deserve to get killed by a speedster.

@MelonHead

I will happily fight your character that has a reaction speed of one Planck second - the smallest unit of time possible - with a character that can move at a proportional speed, and I guarantee that you will be dead.

Your ability to perceive my attacking you at that speed is completely irrelevant if your body is not fast enough to use the information. You may have a hundred thousand effective years with your mega reactions, but that does not allow your body to react. It will be a very, very long wait before you die.

Arena Chat Thread

Unless you can /explain/ how you're doing what you're doing within the logical constraints of the physics applied to the given universe you're in, you can't do it.

That is the rule that we tend to follow, and it is the rule that makes the most sense.

Arena Chat Thread

My interest in combat is, unfortunately, very strictly tied to the act of combat itself. There are remarkably few settings in which I am content to both fight and engage in plot.

Arena Chat Thread

It wouldn't make any sense to only have ranked matches.

You can most certainly have an unranked battle.

Arena Chat Thread

<Snipped quote by Tuujaimaa>

Find me a man who can shoot fire from his hands and come back to me on how logic should dictate post by post combat.

Of course, melting metal with fire requires incredibly high temperatures, and would essentially allow you to kill any character even up to the supernatural tier instantaneously, which is why the system is in place. You wouldn't be allowed to fight anyone you could kill instantly unless they for some reason accepted a fight that unfair.

@MelonHead

Logic does not strictly apply to Tier 1.

Let's say that we're using the Narutoverse or the Bleachverse (for simplicity's sake due to there being established rules). This universe has its own set of rules and thus logic that will be used in fights. Logic is not inherently tied to the realms of reality.

The argument lies within the idea of a character's power being based on all members within a tier having equal power (that is the implication I took from your argument - please correct me if I misunderstood). Not all characters are equal, and not all power levels are equal. Tiers should exist to separate meaningful boundaries that power levels cannot cross without massively giving an advantage or disadvantage to a given side.

RPGuild Ranking Headquarters!

I tend to be of the opinion that outright brutality and mercilessness is the way to go. I am in this fight to kill you, and kill you I shall. :L