The following warnings occurred:
Warning [2] Undefined array key "fragment" - Line: 1494 - File: inc/class_parser.php PHP 8.1.27 (Linux)
File Line Function
/inc/class_error.php 153 errorHandler->error
/inc/class_parser.php 1494 errorHandler->error_callback
/inc/class_parser.php 1640 postParser->mycode_parse_video
[PHP] postParser->mycode_parse_video_callback
/inc/class_parser.php 513 preg_replace_callback
/inc/class_parser.php 228 postParser->parse_mycode
/inc/functions_post.php 817 postParser->parse_message
/showthread.php 1118 build_postbit
Warning [2] Undefined array key 0 - Line: 1587 - File: inc/class_parser.php PHP 8.1.27 (Linux)
File Line Function
/inc/class_error.php 153 errorHandler->error
/inc/class_parser.php 1587 errorHandler->error_callback
/inc/class_parser.php 1640 postParser->mycode_parse_video
[PHP] postParser->mycode_parse_video_callback
/inc/class_parser.php 513 preg_replace_callback
/inc/class_parser.php 228 postParser->parse_mycode
/inc/functions_post.php 817 postParser->parse_message
/showthread.php 1118 build_postbit
Warning [2] Undefined variable $search_thread - Line: 60 - File: showthread.php(1617) : eval()'d code PHP 8.1.27 (Linux)
File Line Function
/inc/class_error.php 153 errorHandler->error
/showthread.php(1617) : eval()'d code 60 errorHandler->error_callback
/showthread.php 1617 eval
Warning [2] Undefined variable $forumjump - Line: 89 - File: showthread.php(1617) : eval()'d code PHP 8.1.27 (Linux)
File Line Function
/inc/class_error.php 153 errorHandler->error
/showthread.php(1617) : eval()'d code 89 errorHandler->error_callback
/showthread.php 1617 eval




Mages & Earth Magic
#76
Techno-mages spur from the idea that there is arcane infused technology found within WoW. An example of such is Ethereal technology within Outlands that is more often than not mechanics infused with magic.

Techno-priests is a variant that was discussed in detail between GMs and agreed upon due to the capabilities of a Priest.

Cyborg arms are within WoW (Example).
Reply
#77
So are elementalists.
[Image: Ml7sNnX.gif]
Reply
#78
Which I've stated in a previous post and the details of each type of them shown in WoW.
Reply
#79
Yes. You have proved my point. It's arcane.

Fine, whatever. I'll post a profile and we can argue about it there. I've seen arguments accepted with even less evidence than this, and I find this to be growing increasingly silly.

There are no techno-mages in WoW, and yet those are allowed entirely based on their existence in the d20 and because of a race we're not allowed to play that uses highly advanced technology. I see your points, and I see what connections you're trying to make. But whatever, it's beginning to irritate me only because of the fact that even if you were correct in assuming some kind of 'twilight magic', even though they're ostensibly using arcane from the sources given, I don't see the problem with allowing it based on the belief that it is arcane, because I do believe in fact that it is, because we're told so by the RPG. I find it silly that we're going to pick and choose certain things and not allow something like a mage who can simply conjure rocks instead of ice or fire. Besides, what harm could come of it anyway? I've given my evidence, and you've given yours. Your side doesn't have the evidence, from my eyes, to prove that it isn't arcane, as it is said to be arcane from the only sources we're given. I reiterate, why does it matter if I'm summoning rocks and using magic based around the manipulation of earth rather than manipulating fire, frost, or electricity when we're given a source stating that something like that exists. Even as blizzard said, some parts of this is to be taken as canon. In the RPG, I did check, it is a variant for mages and not shaman or priests or what-have-you. Most of the variants I've seen in the first place are based off of RPG information, so, no matter how much evidence, proof, or lore I give you, at the end of the day it's either going to be, 'No, this is forbidden.' or 'Yes, we'll allow it.'

Edit: And this has dragged itself on far too long now, and it's just beginning to seem as if the tiniest flaw in Blizzard's occasional lore lapse is going to be exploited just to deny it.
edit2: Just rereading for spelling errs, and I did come to a realization. This argument as gone from 'We don't want this to happen because it infringes upon Shaman.' to 'This is unfounded in lore and we cannot do it.'
[Image: Ml7sNnX.gif]
Reply
#80
Magical force moves objects in game all the time, not just on large scale like well, floating castles and the city of dalaran.
And in the novels, arcane is noted to be able to do just about anything, within reason and balance of course.

Is it unbalancing if someone simply can make temporary rocks that disintigrate into arcane dust and fade away like how arcane ice simply melts/fades away.
There is no real end of the world in letting that happen.

It is not like the mage can actually be an armored battlemage after all, but the shaman can pull roles as a healer, caster and hybrid of the above plus melee capable.
Giving magi rocks, telekenetic force or maybe a few ounce of acid; will not end warcraft as you know it.
[Image: lich_king_signature_by_wyrx-d3jo9rm.png]
Reply
#81
We take RPG-based concepts and try to make them fit on a case-by-case basis... and now criticism is being thrown about that everything from it isn't allowed? Heh...

Give a mouse a cookie...

I'm still of the belief that there's a few different viewpoints being expressed in this thread based on different perceptions of what's being argued, and I'm not all that certain that everyone is on the same page yet. Are we debating whether 'earth magic' can be arcane? I suppose so because the point of this thread was to deny mages from using it, from what I gather, and now we have other debating occurring (which probably would have been started in another thread being as it's a somewhat-related-but-different topic).

It seemed so simple at first - keep mages to more arcane stuffs (and obvious examples in-game; not obscure things) and shaman to... well, elemental stuff.
Reply
#82
The thing is I'm not criticizing that you're not taking everything. I just think that in this case there is enough in-game and RPG evidence to support it. But like I said, I'm going to make a profile and we can discuss it there, if that would be more convenient.
[Image: Ml7sNnX.gif]
Reply
#83
I actually tend to agree to some extent regarding the feasibility of an elementalist (based on some NPCs in-game). However, discussion for that can occur in your thread.
Reply
#84
Kretol, where is my cookie? You said a mouse could have a cookie!
[Image: Lirshar_zpscaa814f0.png]
Reply
#85
He knows better. Then you'll want a demolisher.

EDIT: The merits of the argument aside, I must admit that the responses on this post disturb me some. From my point of view I'm essentially seeing 'You can have X and Y type of mage now', and in return 'But why can't we have this one too?'

Not attempting to spark anything; it just seems somewhat eerie to me.
Reply
#86
I fully agree, Rigley...

Perhaps it's because I'm divorced from the subject entirely, but I see this and just think, "Jeez. Why is this happening, at all...?"

Argue, argue, argue. S'all we ever do, anymore.

... I have a feeling the next post will be one protesting against my use of the word, "argue," because divinity forbid people admit to arguing.


Edit: And before that happens - Here's a definition of the word, courtesy of Dictionary.com:

ar·gue (ärgy)
v. ar·gued, ar·gu·ing, ar·gues
v.tr.
1. To put forth reasons for or against; debate: "It is time to stop arguing tax-rate reductions and to enact them" (Paul Craig Roberts).
2. To attempt to prove by reasoning; maintain or contend: The speaker argued that more immigrants should be admitted to the country.
3. To give evidence of; indicate: "Similarities cannot always be used to argue descent" (Isaac Asimov).
4. To persuade or influence (another), as by presenting reasons: argued the clerk into lowering the price.
v.intr.
1. To put forth reasons for or against something: argued for dismissal of the case; argued against an immediate counterattack.
2. To engage in a quarrel; dispute.
10,000 days in the fire is long enough,
You're going home...
Reply
#87


No need to get so riled up over what should be a non-issue, no need to be so critical of each other either. Personally I am for the allowance of geomancer/elementalists and what have you because they are balanced in what they can and cannot do.

Elementalists forsake all utility mage spells in exchange for the power of nature(figuratively). As Mouse and I were discussing last night...if one plays an elementalist, they must be able to admit the danger in it. By binding an elemental to your will, shamans will hate you..and indeed possess an advantage over you. The shaman would no doubt be trying to free it, combined with the elemental fighting the elementalist every step of the way...I'd say one's will would quickly be overcome.

Let's just try to keep the tension low guys, ain't a big deal.

Reply
#88
Maybe I see classes differently..But shouldn't an Elementalist be a Shaman?
[Image: anigif_mobile_9893b2566588ab845c7985f71769a9f2-7.gif]
Reply
#89
Elementalists use arcane magic, not nature magic.

Reply
#90
Naw, Elementalists (the arcane ones) enslave elementals. Shamans parlay and deal with them. Everything to do with a Shaman has balance at its core, and their spells reflect this. An Elementalist, well...punches the elemental spirit with arcane until they do their bidding. And it isn't as extensive and complex a bidding as a Shaman could ask for.

As I read/understood it.
[Image: tumblr_nfm4t0FZcT1rtcd58o1_r1_500.gif]
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)