|
|
|
 |

June 8th, 2010, 08:30 AM
|
Corporal
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Wichtia, KS
Posts: 96
Thanks: 8
Thanked 5 Times in 4 Posts
|
|
Re: Official Vanilla vs CBM debate thread
I haven't played CBM, so take this with a grain of salt, but...
I feel like Vanilla is more thematic and "realistic" if there were such a world as this (based on mythological descriptions and things) where CBM tries to balance the gameplay by making more options viable.
Still not sure why GoR in CBM is so cheap, though (as everyone seems to use it, a lot).
|

June 8th, 2010, 09:09 AM
|
Major General
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,157
Thanks: 69
Thanked 116 Times in 73 Posts
|
|
Re: Official Vanilla vs CBM debate thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by RadicalTurnip
I haven't played CBM, so take this with a grain of salt, but...
I feel like Vanilla is more thematic and "realistic" if there were such a world as this (based on mythological descriptions and things) where CBM tries to balance the gameplay by making more options viable.
Still not sure why GoR in CBM is so cheap, though (as everyone seems to use it, a lot).
|
I'm not even sure what 'realistic' means in this context. As long as things follow rules, they're equally good fantasy.
GoR is cheap to encourage people to use it on things other than tarts. Its still too expensive (and tarts are still too cheap).
|

June 9th, 2010, 10:18 AM
|
Corporal
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Wichtia, KS
Posts: 96
Thanks: 8
Thanked 5 Times in 4 Posts
|
|
Re: Official Vanilla vs CBM debate thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by Squirrelloid
I'm not even sure what 'realistic' means in this context. As long as things follow rules, they're equally good fantasy.
|
What I mean is there are reasons not all magic is the same, Haruspex isn't in the same school as Dark Knowledge, and it costs 1 less gem, but requries one higher path. The game isn't made to be "completely balanced."
In a high-magic fantasy world with intelligent smiths and spell-makers, there's a good chance people would find ways of creating things that generate quintessential magic items (gem-gen). While it's not certain, but it's likely.
Basically, to me, CBM seems to be a (Conceptual) Balance Mod, while the original game's focus is more toward flavor (while of course trying to keep it from being overly unbalanced).
|

June 9th, 2010, 10:26 AM
|
Major General
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,157
Thanks: 69
Thanked 116 Times in 73 Posts
|
|
Re: Official Vanilla vs CBM debate thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by RadicalTurnip
Quote:
Originally Posted by Squirrelloid
I'm not even sure what 'realistic' means in this context. As long as things follow rules, they're equally good fantasy.
|
What I mean is there are reasons not all magic is the same, Haruspex isn't in the same school as Dark Knowledge, and it costs 1 less gem, but requries one higher path. The game isn't made to be "completely balanced."
|
Trade ease of casting with cost? Sounds perfectly reasonable and plausibly balanced.
Quote:
In a high-magic fantasy world with intelligent smiths and spell-makers, there's a good chance people would find ways of creating things that generate quintessential magic items (gem-gen). While it's not certain, but it's likely.
|
That depends on what the laws of magic are. If the laws of magic make it impossible, it can't be done. It feels like an artifact level of accomplishment - distilling raw magic should be *hard*. The accomplishment is cheapened considerably if you have hundreds of them.
Quote:
Basically, to me, CBM seems to be a (Conceptual) Balance Mod, while the original game's focus is more toward flavor (while of course trying to keep it from being overly unbalanced).
|
Where does CBM ever lose flavor? Heck, how do you 'lose flavor'? Flavor is whatever you make it. Anything can be justified post hoc, and if the person telling the story is good, it'll sound just as good or better as whatever flavor might have been trampled on to get there.
There are plenty of things in the base game that don't make sense conceptually. A lot of the handling of resources is confused, for example. So claiming vanilla as a paragon of flavor is doomed to failure.
|

June 9th, 2010, 02:05 PM
|
Corporal
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Wichtia, KS
Posts: 96
Thanks: 8
Thanked 5 Times in 4 Posts
|
|
Re: Official Vanilla vs CBM debate thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by Squirrelloid
Where does CBM ever lose flavor? Heck, how do you 'lose flavor'? Flavor is whatever you make it. Anything can be justified post hoc, and if the person telling the story is good, it'll sound just as good or better as whatever flavor might have been trampled on to get there.
There are plenty of things in the base game that don't make sense conceptually. A lot of the handling of resources is confused, for example. So claiming vanilla as a paragon of flavor is doomed to failure.
|
I wasn't necessarily saying that CBM does lose flavor, I was saying that the focus of CBM is balance, while the focus of vanilla is flavor. Obviously, CBM is based on Vanilla, so a lot of the flavor of the original is retained. As I previously stated, I haven't played with CBM, so I don't know how much (if any) of the flavor is lost.
|
Thread Tools |
|
Display Modes |
Hybrid Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is On
|
|
|
|
|