Conquest of the Horde

I'm not speaking of mages. I'm speaking of the elementalist archetype I want to play. How am I supporting that?

Which is: A mage variant.

Grak, again, shamans go about the elements totally differently than mages do. Shamans are practically like Jedi with the Force: the spirits surround them, the spirits bind themselves to them, commune with them. The elements are an extension of the shaman's own body, and have an almost symbiotic relationship.

Mages conjure rocks so they can hit you in the face with it. They can not speak with the earth, they can not properly make it an ally. They use the elements as a weapon, and just a weapon. I don't want to say all mages are selfish, because they aren't but generally speaking a mage is a very selfish calling, where you force natural energies to do your bidding, no matter how benevolent the cause is.

Same difference, you're trying to make the arcane do something that the GM team stated that they don't want to see happen. Your argument is just pointing out how there's already *too much* overlap between mage and shaman, that's not convincing anyone that there should be more when that's clearly the opposite of what's desired.

I don't really know why I argued over this, since it wasn't even my decision and, truth be told, I don't even really care about this that much. Either way, that's what we're left with.

In my silly mind I could see similar logic used to forbid sin'dorei from using the Light to make Alliance paladins feel better, and more "special". Or something. Mages "steal" elemental force, while shamans bid with it and appease it.

I'm not even sure what the point of this new rule is anymore. Other than "we say so".

I'm only debating because it's something I wanted to see happen. However, I don't know why I argued over it because no matter how much sense it makes and no matter how much I want to see it happen I should have known that since it's something no one on the GM team has a desire to do, it won't happen. Don't take that offensively, I mean why should you care about something if it doesn't affect you?

What I'm saying isn't that there's too much overlap, it's that the classes overlap. That's how it is. That's how it's always going to be an denying the fact is silly.

(11-28-2011, 03:15 PM)Grakor456 Wrote: [ -> ]Same difference, you're trying to make the arcane do something that the GM team stated that they don't want to see happen. Your argument is just pointing out how there's already *too much* overlap between mage and shaman, that's not convincing anyone that there should be more when that's clearly the opposite of what's desired.

I don't really know why I argued over this, since it wasn't even my decision and, truth be told, I don't even really care about this that much. Either way, that's what we're left with.

The point of showing the high amount of pre-existing overlap between mages and shamans is to show how silly and arbitrary the forbidding of earth/air elements are. Fire? Ok. Water? Ok. Ice? ok. Electricity? Ok. But rocks and air? That just -crosses the line-.

There doesn't seem to be much reason why a mage can't use earth/air other than "GM staff says so" and "we don't want to make shamans not feel like special snowflakes", despite the fact there is lore supporting mages using the elements, and by extension the fact of the matter is mages and shamans use their powers in such a vastly different manner, you can't even say mages are taking things away from shamans.

Take some, lose some. I can't tell whether the argument is for the archetype to be "everything a mage is, but better!" or what.

I'm also seeing a lot of folks glaze over views provided and jumping to the "GMS DON'T LIKE IT SO THAT'S WHY IT'S NOT ALLOWED!" bit. Again. It's disgusting. That's fine that there are examples of geomancers or whatever, but perhaps there's not a clear indication of whether the statement in my first sentence is correct or not. Are you intending for mages to do everything you can find an inkling of an example of? Or was your variant intending to focus on something different than normal mages do, and lose other specializations?

Is the debate occurring even for the same reasons?

All my mage can do is magic with stone, rock, sand, earth. No water, fire, lightning, wind, ice, &c&c. Just earth.

And Kret, it's not disgusting because while it may just look like I'm jumping to that what should I think after fifty posts and the denying argument being 'Because the GM team said so.'

(11-28-2011, 03:17 PM)c0rzilla Wrote: [ -> ]In my silly mind I could see similar logic used to forbid sin'dorei from using the Light to make Alliance paladins feel better, and more "special". Or something. Mages "steal" elemental force, while shamans bid with it and appease it.

I'm not even sure what the point of this new rule is anymore. Other than "we say so".

(11-28-2011, 03:20 PM)Aphetoros Wrote: [ -> ]I'm only debating because it's something I wanted to see happen. However, I don't know why I argued over it because no matter how much sense it makes and no matter how much I want to see it happen I should have known that since it's something no one on the GM team has a desire to do, it won't happen. Don't take that offensively, I mean why should you care about something if it doesn't affect you?

The passive-aggressiveness is doing neither of you any favors. I would ask that you stop, as it's just going to make this thread go downhill very quickly.

We COULD just make mages defined completely by their spellbooks. We COULD let them do nothing more than their fire/frost/arcane. We're letting them do more than that. Do not hint that we're being tyrants or pointlessly restricting your creativity or otherwise being dicks just because we won't let you do a specific concept. Seriously.

(11-28-2011, 03:23 PM)CappnRob Wrote: [ -> ]The point of showing the high amount of pre-existing overlap between mages and shamans is to show how silly and arbitrary the forbidding of earth/air elements are. Fire? Ok. Water? Ok. Ice? ok. Electricity? Ok. But rocks and air? That just -crosses the line-.

There doesn't seem to be much reason why a mage can't use earth/air other than "GM staff says so" and "we don't want to make shamans not feel like special snowflakes", despite the fact there is lore supporting mages using the elements, and by extension the fact of the matter is mages and shamans use their powers in such a vastly different manner, you can't even say mages are taking things away from shamans.

And for pet peeve #2, do NOT say that we're doing this just because we "say so." We've given reasons. You may personally disagree with those reasons, and you may believe that those reasons are weak, but we are NOT saying "This is how it is because we say so." Explanations have been given. Saying otherwise is just purposefully misrepresenting the position of the opposition, and that's a fallacy.

And yeah, I CAN say that mages are taking things away from shamans. I've pointed out before, nothing is stopping mages from using their magic defensively. For elements under their control, the only thing really separating mages and shamans is that mages can't heal, and some folks are suggesting that they should even be able to do that.

Perhaps the debate should be whether your variant of a mage can do precisely that, then. I believe the big argument thus far presented (from the GM's perspective) is to disallow normal mages from... essentially doing everything. Regardless, thank you for clearing that up for me.

(11-28-2011, 03:32 PM)Kretol Wrote: [ -> ]Take some, lose some. I can't tell whether the argument is for the archetype to be "everything a mage is, but better!" or what.

I'm also seeing a lot of folks glaze over views provided and jumping to the "GMS DON'T LIKE IT SO THAT'S WHY IT'S NOT ALLOWED!" bit. Again. It's disgusting. That's fine that there are examples of geomancers or whatever, but perhaps there's not a clear indication of whether the statement in my first sentence is correct or not. Are you intending for mages to do everything you can find an inkling of an example of? Or was your variant intending to focus on something different than normal mages do, and lose other specializations?

Is the debate occurring even for the same reasons?

I'd imagine an elementalist would lose some of the perks the standardized mage has. In lore, most mages focus on expanding exclusively on a single element (fire mages, ice mages), so an elementalist would come off as a jack of all trades for the forces of arcane nature. But I digress.

The argument is to permit mages to do stuff that is supported in lore to fall within the walls of their abilities... and yeah, lore says mages have preeeeeeetty big damn boundaries to cross (see: the entirety of Quel'Thalas).

... as for me, I'm mostly playing devil's advocate, because I'm something of a dumbass. I find it reasonable to support at least earth-mages (honestly air magic sort of eludes me on a mage, except for stuff like Cone of Cold and slowfall, but for all we know slowfall is using the arcane to manipulate your mass or whatever to make you fall slower).

Then again, the entire point of a mage is they give a huge middle finger to physics and reality and do whatever they want, so yeah.

Also, another thing to consider for all you pro-elementalists is the toll of using so much arcane power. Arcane corruption is real, and mages who RP should represent it in their characters.

Edit: Spoony post ninjas! Here we go.

Quote:And for pet peeve #2, do NOT say that we're doing this just because we "say so." We've given reasons. You may personally disagree with those reasons, and you may believe that those reasons are weak, but we are NOT saying "This is how it is because we say so." Explanations have been given. Saying otherwise is just purposefully misrepresenting the position of the opposition, and that's a fallacy.

And yeah, I CAN say that mages are taking things away from shamans. I've pointed out before, nothing is stopping mages from using their magic defensively. For elements under their control, the only thing really separating mages and shamans is that mages can't heal, and some folks are suggesting that they should even be able to do that.

First of all, ok I'll belt on the pet peeve issue. I mostly just misunderstood this post is all:

Quote:you're trying to make the arcane do something that the GM team stated that they don't want to see happen.

BUT I DIGRESS ON THAT MATTER IT WAS NOT MY INTENT TO OFFEND.

Mages can use their magic defensively, sure. But again, you have not addressed the issue of domestic application of being a shaman VS a mage. I've already said that shamans are practically like Jedi, and live in such harmony with the spirits and elements that they essentially use them as a third limb. Being a shaman comes with a hefty responsibility and dedication to the elements. Since this is more than just about "fight RP", then this stuff should carry some significant weight, especially because this is where RP shines. If we were discussing gameplay mechanics, then yeah I wouldn't let mages do shaman stuff because that'd unbalance the game, but this is about RP and application of theories in our RP, not balancing gameplay. Totally useless domestic stuff like communing with spirits can come into play here.

And it is to that end where I say mages aren't taking as much away from shamans as you think. Ok, yeah, let's say they can fight with fire/water/earth/lightning/air/your mom, just for the sake of the argument. To keep it simple, let's just say a mage can use any of those elements in anyway feasible by his imagination, be it earthquakes or snowstorms or whatever.

We have a pretty powerful, destructive force of nature here. But, now let's see what shamans can do.

Shamans can manipulate the living energies of the earth to heal others. This is more than just stuff like "healing wave", but also consider stuff like Everliving Weapon and Earth Shield, using the forces of earth to heal others on the most primal level. There is also the use of water, as well, using the two most common components of carbon based lifeforms to make them recover (water and dirt, basically).

Shamans commune with fire to increase their abilities and sensations as well. To get into borderline Avatar: The Last Airbender territory here, a shaman can use an almost inner-fire like ability to improve their meditation and mental focus (ie Flametongue Weapon, Totem of Wrath, whatever). Fire improves their reflexes and makes them more sharp minded (there are totems that give haste rating for DoTs caused by flame shock). It goes so much deeper and more respectful than a mage's "use fire to burn faces".

And these are just things I conceived off the top of my head using arbitrary in game mechanics as examples. Mages might have the breadth of controlling and defying every physical law of the natural world, but shamans have an unforseen depth and understanding of the natural world that comes with their super-special-awesome spirit ties.

And that is why Madugo is a shaman and not a mage :D

...So, it isn't that the GMs just say so. I have seen the discussion on this and I have seen this post as well. They have given reasons.

But all I can figure out is that..

"The reasons aren't good enough."

Or am I missing something?

EDIT: I am late. :C

You know... There could be another reason why our mages can't use earth and whatever the other one is that people are arguing... Mechanically I'm sure in some way its possible but... Ingame how many mages are accessible that use earth? Most of the best mages in Azeroth, those from Dalaran, all focus on Arcane and Ice. In fact, it probably wouldn't be an easy to become a fire expert because of the focus on those two fields.

So yeah, maybe its possible to use arcane magic to move earth... But there isn't much justification for why your character knows how to. There isn't even a preference of mages to use other elements. Its like the Warlocks knowing frost magic argument. Yeah, sure, logically they could. But no one really... does.

You all are forgetting that Elementalists, the variant Aph is talking about, doesn't even touch elemental magic.

Quote:Elementalists study arcane elemental magic to become more like elementals, which they revere.

I can't see the problem, when they're just using a subbranch of Arcane.

...While I understand the discussion is about mages and shaman and what is fair for who to be able to do what with which of the classical elements...

What about warlocks?

I have an invested interest in the class, and in full spirit of demanding a mile when someone else is given an inch, I'm wholeheartedly for warlock rights!


From my skimming, I've tentatively concluded that the staff want to preserve the unique and disparate "flavor" of a shaman's capabilities while defining what freedoms a mage is allowed.

While by all means, I'm a firm forever late to any discussion on the matter...

The questions I would have asked are... What is the nature of these abilities?

What is the theme of the class? Why do they have these powers? Who decides how they receive them?

Why does a water elemental help a mage when summoned? What are those wolf things that shaman summo-...


These questions aren't answered in any solid lore sources, sadly enough, even if one should dare suggest such things even exist.