>I'm writing up a proposal for this now. Of course the kill zone begins at your feet and works outwards exempting nothing and ends when you can no longer concentrate. Unfortunately, in testing no one has survived to see the meditation kill anything else, but I'm sure that'll work itself out in due time.

Meditate Sepuku.

Sweet!

---

Magic is not a crutch. Its just something Mages need to get through life.

I know I'm a bit late, but I've been giving this some thought lately. Long post, but the following is just the direction I think we're headed in the future and not a complaint, just how I'd like meditations to play a role in the future. First, I want to get into what I'd like to see out of meditations. Then I'll explain my reasoning for it.

I want meditations to be unique. I don't want to see them as another "buff" like dances and berserks, but more as some sort of guideline to those abilities. I think meditations should take time to get started. I'm not sold on the specifics, but I wouldn't mind if they took 5 minutes just to start up, as long as they last more than 5 minutes :P. I kind of picture a lot of meditations that have certain requirements and so forth as well as a system that gives the Barbarian control over which he wants to choose, similar to roars. I think they also shouldn't rely on inner fire since that'd be kind of stretching one pool for a lot of abilities.

Just to throw out a few ideas, I see meditations giving us more control of the strength and duration of our abilities. When you first join the guild, Agonar speaks about training and controlling our magic resistance. I want a variety of meditations to be associated with our BMR. For example, one may strengthen our resistance to SvW spells (not in winning the contest, but in resisting it via BMR). Another may help against SvS, and SvA. I'm not opposed to meditations that help control bleeding, poison, or anything else like that, but I primarily want to have more control over magic resistance.

The reason is because I'm starting to get more experience with BMR and I'm noticing some things. First of all is sacrifice. As Barbarians, we sacrifice a lot of systems, abilities, privileges, stats, and items all for just ONE ability. BMR. I won't list everything since it's not relevant to my point, but I just want to throw it out there that a lot is blown right by us since we supposedly hate magic.

Secondly, this BMR ability is almost completely unnoticable below 60th circle. Hopefully that will be addressed when BMR is re-scaled. Regarding the re-scaling, another interesting thing I noticed is how my 80's circled Barbarian handles magic. Typically, being in the 80's for any guild usually means that they will have mastered or come close to mastering most of their abilities. It's hardly the case for BMR.

Currently, my Barbarian's BMR is quite noticable positively in three ways.

1. Resisting spells from smaller circled folks, who would probably fail the contest had I not resisted anyway.
2. Resisting min/low prepped spells from similarly circled folks.
3. Severely crippling the TM of magical users of similar or even higher circle + stats.

With the upcoming BMR change, Dartenian has expressed that BMR will no longer reduce TM below the bonus gained from targetting. Which means pretty much the most important benefit I gain out of BMR will be smashed. However, I agree with this change. BMR seems to protect better against TM than disablers, and I really think it should be the other way around.

It all kind of leads into the role I'd like to see meditations play a part in some day. Currently, there are spells that defends against magic even better than BMR does (barring those super 150th dancing dragon Barbarians that got it coming). I have nothing against that, but it makes me wonder if we should be able to hone our own BMR to be stronger in certain areas, even at the cost of being weaker in others. I can't fathom a better way to do this than meditations.

Lastly, our guild is one of the few/only that has a real use for every single stat. Physicals power our berserks and are needed for weapon usage, mentals power our dances/BMR and charisma powers our roars. I compared a few stats with Moon Mages and other guilds to try to get a better understanding of why it's so hard to defend against certain spells and what I saw was something like this: 20 STR, 20 STAM, 50 DIS, 45 INT, 45 CHA, 25 AGI. And then I'm like... oh, no wonder. Strength and Stamina doesn't seem to play a major role in actual spellcasting (not the contests) whereas they're pretty big with just using some weapons. Then, there's some guilds that have almost no need for charisma and so forth. So while Barbarians need this balance of stats for their abilities, they also usually have a smaller number of tdps from being locked of a skillset. All in all, it can actually make them weaker against certain spells (especially ones that penetrate BMR very well) than one from another guild would be, not that BMR has almost no effect until a Barbarian has reached a certain high circle.

It's a system that's seems to actually lean in favor of spell casters, but attempting to balance it with BMR and MR. To be honest, I kind of like the way it's set up since I believe magic shouldn't be just a small tool to play around with, it should be powerful and not subject to uselessness just because a Barb is extremely high circle. Just so there's no real controversy, I'm not advocating for anything of another guild to change in this post. I'm focusing mainly on us. Since the world beyond the dreaded BMR nerf isn't clear, I wanted to propose some ways to allow us to be able to use our BMR more effectively. I have no idea how effective it will be against the new spirit spells but I do want it to stand a chance.

To sort of wrap it all up, I think the entire BMR vs. Magic equation could be difficult to balance since there's a number of things that factor into the various contests. It's a battle of skills (PM) and stats, and sometimes that can be hard to mix. No Barbarian wants to be weak against magic, and no Mage wants to have their magic completely nullified by BMR. Giving Barbarians a little more control in what they resist (just as Mages have control in what they cast) would be helpful, I think. So, that's kind of how I envision the role of meditations at the moment, in hoping we could get a unique ability that might help solve a few BMR issues.

Vinjince

---

"There are five possible operations for any army. If you can fight, fight; if you cannot fight, defend; if you cannot defend, flee; if you cannot flee, surrender; if you cannot surrender, die."

- Sima Yi

>I want meditations to be unique. I don't want to see them as another "buff" like dances and berserks

As it stands right now, you will not be seeing anymore "buff abilities," period. The guild currently has a buff for just about everything we use. On top of those, as we get higher levels, we have buffs that build on previous buffs. It is a bit out of control.

>The reason is because I'm starting to get more experience with BMR and I'm noticing some things. First of all is sacrifice. As Barbarians, we sacrifice a lot of systems, abilities, privileges, stats, and items all for just ONE ability. BMR. I won't list everything since it's not relevant to my point, but I just want to throw it out there that a lot is blown right by us since we supposedly hate magic.

I can't and won't make any statement regarding BMR until I've had more detailed discussions with the Magic Team, Combat Team, and Dev Team leader. Anything I said would be much too subject to change.

>Secondly, this BMR ability is almost completely unnoticable below 60th circle.

Have to pretty strongly disagree here.

>The bit about stats and the slant of the system.

I won't deny that we have to train a lot of things to max out, but I don't know that it is as bad as you're saying. There is a point where you have to make some decisions, though, which I know can be rough.

Not going to lie, folks, meditations are a while out. Too much is wrong with the current set up to throw something else in there. If I had meditations coded and ready for release right now, I'd have to change them later based on what corrections are made to our own abilities or upcoming changes to systems. My current priorities are in identifying and correcting things that are wrong, askew, and/or stupid.

I'm not saying meditations are dead, I'm simply saying that what isn't doing what it should needs fixing before anything more is put into to the arsenal.


~GM Aurdun
Barbarians' Guild Advocate
Gor'Tog Co-Champion
History Guru

"Don't use logic on scientists. That's just mean." ~ GM Zeyurn

>My current priorities are in identifying and correcting things that are wrong, askew, and/or stupid.


So when can we expect the War Stomp rewrite ?

Hey Aurdun,

<<I'm not saying meditations are dead, I'm simply saying that what isn't doing what it should needs fixing before anything more is put into to the arsenal.>>

Thank you for being honest.

<<My current priorities are in identifying and correcting things that are wrong, askew, and/or stupid.>>

Can you please check and make sure two roars are working appropriately? Magic's Bane and Mage's Lament. I've been out for a few years and when the roars came out, Skiori mentioned they would be adjusted (they mentioned they were not working appropriately). However, no adjustment has come. Magic's Bane is supposed to lower a creature/character's PM/HA skills and Mage's Lament is supposed to lower a creature/character's TM skill.

Would you consider those two roars to be wrong or askew?

I think the problem is that Skiori was also waiting for magic to be re-written - not sure if this has changed. So, unfortunately, those roars and how they would affect creatures/characters will also have to wait, unless you get the go ahead to do something about it?

If they are working as intended and someone fixed them while I was gone - that's wonderful, then.

- Simon

<<there's a limit to how far I'm going to allow it to go, at least on an "all-the-time" basis.>>

If that is the instance, why not just lower the passive magical resistance from every character to nothing (including Barbarians)? Only allow magical resistance for barbarian dances and barbarian berserks (so Barbarians still have an active method of using magical resistance). That would make the issue of not being all the time magical resistance coverage and changing it to "Temporary turbo charged BMR."

- Simon

Roars are going to see change. I like what most of the roars do (or in some cases, SHOULD do) but they need to be balanced better and if you saw some of the things that make up the roar contest, you'd shake your head.

If the changes are over drastic, I'd be pushing for a clean slate. I'm not going to send you guys up a creek without a paddle, I swear. So yes, Simon, those roars will be seeing work done to them. A few more good discussion and I think some more appreciable work can be done

~GM Aurdun
Barbarians' Guild Advocate
Gor'Tog Co-Champion
History Guru

"Don't use logic on scientists. That's just mean." ~ GM Zeyurn

(insert monthly request for the ability to poach 2 legged critters and PCs while dancing Panther)


____________
Satfiki wipes a bit of Rmel's spittle from her arm.

You make an excellent point Simon, and it's one I've thought about myself. What is likely to happen (I haven't completed a formula yet) is that you'll see a pretty heavy reduction in effectiveness of lower level group members, but something nicer as they get bigger. In all honesty, it probably won't be as strong as it is now. Just because you have a group behind you doesn't mean the roar of an 80th level character with 20 30th level characers should be able to pull off immobilizing a 150th level character for 5 seconds.

I'll discuss specifics more as a formula develops.

~GM Aurdun
Barbarians' Guild Advocate
Gor'Tog Co-Champion
History Guru

"Don't use logic on scientists. That's just mean." ~ GM Zeyurn

>>The problem is that BMR was conceived at a time when barbarians had little else going for them -- it was intended to be the trade-off for not having magic. Which seems fair enough. But these days, barbarians have some of the most effective (if not most effective) buffs, crowd control, and utility abilities in the game. No, they aren't magic, but they pretty much do what magic does. A rose by any other name is just as thorny.


Except that we can't train that rose and all of the benefits of an easily scriptable skill set (ie. hundreds of TDP's) Hell we are actually hindered/penalized for learning an entire skill set no other guild is penalized to this extent. That's one big thorn in our sides

<<<<Hell we are actually hindered/penalized for learning an entire skill set no other guild is penalized to this extent.>>

Yeah - but there are a lot more weapon skills than magic skills - as far as TDPs go anyway.

And Paladins are penalized for learning stealing - however - they do have the ability to wipe it clean.

It would be nice if we had this option (while keeping the penalty of use though).

--Vyraka--

Well said Dragoonseal. And I find the arguments just as frustrating. Well said indeed.


______
Kertig Heart Magdar Bluefletch, Legendary Barbarian of M'Riss

I just calculated the tdp differential for the scenarios listed above.

Barbarian with 25 primary skills at 100 ranks = 625 tdp's.

Moonie with 5 primary skills at 500 ranks = 3125 tdp's

Barbarian with 25 primary skills at 200 ranks = 2500 tdp's

Moonie with 5 primary skills at 1000 ranks = 27,500 tdp's.

Things that make you go hmmm....


___________________________________

What JLo said is pretty much spot on.
- GM Dartenian

>>This statement needs to be addressed. A lot about this discussion needs to be addressed, but I don't have it in me anymore to bother. I'm tired of this discussion, because this discussion has been going for more than half a decade. I don't have the energy or will to defend against the magic build GMs anymore, to spend so much time presenting logic, facts, suggestions, opinions, only to have them once again ignore it all, sweep it under the rug, and get their way with Barbarian abilities, again. The only reason I'm even posting is because Simon wanted me to.

Now, normally I do my absolute best to be polite in my responses. I sometimes fail but I do honestly try. However, the venom within this post and attacks on the character of various GM's past and present have gone quite far enough in my opinion.

>>Anyway, the statement about TDPs. I want to direct this also at GM Dartenian, because Dart's last post here left a really terrible taste in my mouth, because of a GM opinion that Barb abililties = entire magic system. Obviously magic using guilds and non-magic using guilds are never going to see eye to eye on certain things, and in the end thats fine because a lot of the issues aren't important to the overall picture, but the TDPs issue is vastly important and I want people to both understand why, and not sweep it under a rug again.

Have you ever stopped to concider that perhaps we HAVE checked into it? Not only checked into it but did more thorough testing than you could possibly ever attempt? Guess what? GM's in the past have done exactly that when this argument has come up before. Dartenian himself did testing on this less than 2 years ago. I did some today just to shut you all up on this old, tired and completely and utterly biased and unfounded complaint.

Let me begin with your personal logic.

>>TDP gain from skills is on an exponential curve. It looks like this:

Which is not at all relevant to this discussion as it completely misses the facts of the matter and instead simply looks at a minute portion of the overall picture purely for the sake of finding the results you personally want to see to make your point which you decided upon in advance.

>>Working with this is the big problem of being able to keep skills locked or learning fast. Can you lock 20 weapons at a time? No, so you get no TDP benefit from them. With a weapon's primary pool (Barb) can you even lock 5 weapons at a time without severe backtraining or overhunting? I've never been able to without backtraining, and it kills any defensive exp both from the backtraining and because of the quick rate you have to
kill to get the weapons exp.

This completely ignores all aspects of who trains what skills for how long in comparison to what other skills. Yes, it is possible for a mage to train magic alot. It is also possible for a barbarian to circle based almost purely on skills trained in combat. I'll bet you could in fact train a barbarian only ever in combat and have no troubles circling. You might need to leave for one or two skills perhaps. And in combat you can train how many at a time? Comparing a slew of skills at 200 ranks to 5 at 1000 is also completely irrelevant as you guys yourselves have pointed out that scenario doesn't even happen so who cares about it?

You state a barbarian cannot keep 5 weapons locked at a time. Okay, but that is still JUST weapons you are talking about. How many armor types do you normally wear in combat? Use a shield? Parry and evade? Appraise your target? Hide and stalk? Skin it? Does it use stealth and teach any perception? Now how many skills are you training compared to that unnamed mage not in combat training his magics?

>>But there's more. Can you work weapons while in town? While swimming or climbing? While farting around at the bazaar? While smithing in the forge? While fishing? While at a fest? While healing? While training any number of other survival or lore skills? No, you can't, but can you train magic skills while doing all of those things? Yes. More over, except for TM, magic skills are not penalized at all for being massively overtrained compared to the rest of your skills, and its actually encouraged that one do so because there are nothing but benefits. Like TM, can't do this with any weapon skills, or you soon find you can't hunt anything that actually teaches weapons.

Please see above about other skills trained in combat. Weapons are never learned in exclusion unless backtraining just for them and most folks doing that will also pick up another armor or something else to maximize that time.

>>On top of all this, and if we're going to be frank, probably the most important, what are magic skills? They are easily trained, easily scripted. Anywhere, everywhere, anytime, all the time, trained to obscene ranks for one's circle. And along with that, obscene TDPs for one's circle.

You say this like no one has ever figured out how to safely script combats. I think the folks in TF might beg to differ on that score.

Now, onto my own testing on tdp's. What I did was pull up all folks between 80-90th circle in all guilds. I then ran their total skills through a circle calculator to pull the total number of tdp's gained from skills alone. I divided this by circle to get tdp's per circle. Not a perfect measure but with that small of a sample range it is enough for the purposes of this discussion.

First, your argument is that being excluded from magic entirely hinders you. Thus, I will present the numerical ranges for non-magic guilds.

Barbarians 64-77 tdp's per circle.
Thieves 45-92 tdp's per circle.
Traders 26 tdp's per circle.

Now, to be entirely fair as you are magic tertiary the proper course is to compare you to other magic tertiary guilds that DO have magic access...Rangers and Paladins.

Ranger 53-86 tdp's per circle
Paladin 38-49 tdp's per circle.

Guess having access to magic didn't change things for them all that much, now did it?

How about magic secondaries?

Empaths 43-65 tdp's per circle.
Bards 48 tdp's per circle.

Okay, so that leaves us the magic primaries you choose to compare yourselves against even though that's again trying to completely bias the testing simply to meet the results you specifically want.

Warrior mages 55-85 tdp's per circle.
Moon Mages 91 tdp's per circle.

Please note in the above if I didn't provide a range it was because there was only one example at the time of testing and so the results aren't at all conclusive. There were no clerics at the time of my testing. It is interesting to note however that there was at least one thief with comperable tdp's to the moon mage I found and yet somehow the thief actually managed this without access to active magic training which totally defies all belief.

I compared my results with those of Dartenian's. He performed his testing as I said about a year and a half to two years ago. He did it during prime time which admittedly I did not and he tested over the course of 3 days. I'd have done similiar but in all honesty I couldn't let this venom fester that long without a response. That said, my results match up very well with his own. The guilds ranked roughly the same in relation to each other as when he tested. So far as I'm concerned the results are conclusive enough and so any further claims of a lack of tdp's needs to go directly to the equine cemetary. Barbarians aren't even remotely penalized in excess of any other guild and are in fact quite comperable. It all comes down to how you train and how much you train both in terms of number of skills and effort put into skills not needed to circle directly. The guild itself does not show as having a bias against itself in terms of capability.

GM Oolan Jeel

"One of the main causes of the fall of the Roman Empire was that, lacking zero, they had no way to indicate successful termination of their C programs." Robert Firth

The part I always loved about the TDP gap theory is that it would be ultimately meaningless even if it did exist. The TDP gap is only relevant if it limits your character growth (since it is not a gap of time training skills, but a gap in number of skills possible to train), while under our current model you'll have 99 in every statistic long before you run out of skills to train.

-Armifer
"...everything can be taken from a man but one thing: the last of the human freedoms-- to choose one's attitude in any given set of circumstances, to choose one's own way."
-Viktor Frankl

I'm not really concerned about bmr i'm sure whatever you guys do will be fine and there will be plenty of people who will complain as usual. On a side note i don't think iv seen any one topic so active with gm's.


_______________________________________
Naissura squints at the balance beam needle and says, "There's some stuff in here. All told, the backpack weighs about two thousand, one stones," and puts the backpack on the counter.

>>What about poor clerics! i'm just curious.

As I stated a bit further down, there were none on at the point in time I did my testing. However, they have the same skillset as warrior mages so should be roughly in the same range.

GM Oolan Jeel

"One of the main causes of the fall of the Roman Empire was that, lacking zero, they had no way to indicate successful termination of their C programs." Robert Firth

>>Question, if that is the case then could barbs go ahead and access there third skillset, or would they have to worry about a penalty? I'm just asking

I'm not sure what you mean by third skillset. Do you mean their tertiary skills? If so they are quite welcome to use lore to their hearts content. Magic they have the same access as thieves and traders, but yes there will eventually be strong penalties to learning magic which is in turn offset by their stronger MR than thieves have access to.

GM Oolan Jeel

"One of the main causes of the fall of the Roman Empire was that, lacking zero, they had no way to indicate successful termination of their C programs." Robert Firth

>>That's understandable to me, however you need to realize that we, as mere players, have absolutely zero access to what boost is best, second best, third best, etc. The GMs, via the NDA, ensure the player base has very little knowledge of how anything actually works in the game. It's a separate issue entirely, but it needs to be kept in mind before GMs start flipping out over players posting their opinions; opinions which are unable to be supported by facts, simply because the facts are kept from us.

This may be true, but at the same time players often play more than a single guild and compare information. Folks have a pretty good idea where they stand in general and if Barbarians don't know they have strong combat buffs then I'm not sure what to say.

>>It also bears stating that although our boosts may be "some of the best boosts the game has to offer," they are also some of, if not the, most limited boosts the game has to offer. The versatility of magic trumps a Barbarian's limited ability to adjust to certain circumstances - our fallback for that has always been BMR, and it sounds like that is going to change. I'm not trying to argue, I'm trying to explain the logic behind what you GMs apparently feel are venomous attacks.

The venomous attacks I was refering to were the comments claiming that GM's were ignoring facts/arguments, sweeping things under the rug, turning a deaf ear, etc. The simple fact is that I've seen this looked into and reported on by GM's since I myself was a player and every time it is the players themselves that turn a deaf ear because it isn't what they wish to hear.

>>I don't think I've seen anyone ask to be "basically immune to magic." Though, I know you're privy to more information regarding player requests than I. BMR is going to be nerfed, that's understood and accepted. However, it's been expressed in this thread that the entire philosophy of BMR is going to be changed, not just a simple rescaling. It quite honestly came off as a much more severe nerf than I (and I assume many others) was expecting, whether that was the intent of the post or not.

Some have indeed been asking for immunity, or strong enough resistance it amounts to the same thing. As far as the philosophy changing, I think it is fairer to say that we need the players themselves to change how they look at BMR. Many players expect that BMR should mean that if the mage doesn't massively overwhelm them then they shouldn't be able to be affected. This may just be how I personally perceive the overall opinion expressed but there you have it. Barbarians at all levels should be better able to resist spells at all levels, yes. But that does not mean that the spells won't still affect them to some degree.

>>Speaking strictly from my experience, that's the case now. At 150+ I know it changes; Jhime was telling me how his targetted spells are effectively reduced to min prep against Juulmon. I don't think that's balanced in any way. However, on the other end of the spectrum, at approximately 60th circle I only notice resistance against people with sub-300s magics, which doesn't seem at all overpowered to me. I think that may be contributing to the outcry from a good deal of Barbarian players - the fact that their BMR does not seem so out of whack.

That's the rescaling we are talking about though. At lower levels BMR barely exists and at higher levels, baring a few spells that don't react well with it, BMR becomes too overwhelming and we need to rebalance it at both ends.

>>At the risk of perpetuating a pointless "argument", I will point out Barbarians scored lowest of all 3 magic tert guilds in Dart's testing...

>>"Barbarians were #3 on BEST TDPs when I did my survey. The top three were all magic tert."

>>I'm not using that as an argument for anything, I just want to point it out because there's a possibility it can be obscured by the 3 posts piling superlatives onto Barbarian abilities.

First off, there are 5 magic tertiary guilds, so Barbarians ranked middle of that pack. Traders are always deffinately the lowest on the tdp scale. Rangers and thieves are often tdp heavier because of their circling reqs which require a much wider variety of skills and thus more training per circle. That would be why they edged out barbarians. Still, trying to claim they were third of the terts is pointless when they were also third of all of the guilds combined. They were above the very magic primaries that the previous complaints tried to state were guaranteed to outpace Barbarians due to access to magic. In fact if you look again, 2 of the top 3 guilds in Dartenian's survey were not only magic tertiary but also had no access to spells of their own.

>>I'm rambling at this point, so I'll conclude by saying this post is not meant to be argumentative or sarcastic, though I'm sure parts of it are. I'm merely trying to point out some justifications for what the GMs seem to be perceiving as an unjustified outcry from the players.

Understood. However, please also look at it from our side. First off, this argument has come up multiple times and been shot down every time after the GM's have looked at the actual facts involved, namely how many tdp's folks have at higher circles. Second, we welcome observations from the players, but when they devolve into attacks and insults against the staff as a whole or certain members then you generally get responses such as this in return. Lastly, when you use hyperbole and stretched out logic such as the comparison of 22 weapon skills at 200 ranks vs 5 skills at 1000 to support your argument, expect to get hit up side the head by logic in return. Among other points already made, a barbarian with a top weapon skill of 200 ranks wouldn't be the same circle as any mage that has gotten their magics to 1000. I have yet to hear of any magic prime that hit 1000 ranks in a single skill by 40th which is the barbarian primary weapon req of 200 ranks and if the barb had trained 22 weapons to that level I am quite sure they got all of the other reqs covered.

GM Oolan Jeel

"One of the main causes of the fall of the Roman Empire was that, lacking zero, they had no way to indicate successful termination of their C programs." Robert Firth

>I don't think I've seen anyone ask to be "basically immune to magic." Though, I know you're privy to more information regarding player requests than I. BMR is going to be nerfed, that's understood and accepted. However, it's been expressed in this thread that the entire philosophy of BMR is going to be changed, not just a simple rescaling. It quite honestly came off as a much more severe nerf than I (and I assume many others) was expecting, whether that was the intent of the post or not.

>Speaking strictly from my experience, that's the case now. At 150+ I know it changes; Jhime was telling me how his targetted spells are effectively reduced to min prep against Juulmon. I don't think that's balanced in any way. However, on the other end of the spectrum, at approximately 60th circle I only notice resistance against people with sub-300s magics, which doesn't seem at all overpowered to me. I think that may be contributing to the outcry from a good deal of Barbarian players - the fact that their BMR does not seem so out of whack.

You make two fantastic points. To cover the first one, yes, the concept of BMR may change a bit. That is something that we're trying to work out. As Guild Advocate, my roll is to be understanding of where things need to be for the game as a whole, while taking the perspective of all of you, and making the correct the correct adjustments and balancing things that need to be. That is what we're working on right now, and why you saw 4 different GMs post one after another {g}.

Second, the disparity between 150 and 60th level BMR that you're brought up is one of my major frustrations with the current setup. If we can devise a way for the godlike immunity to go away at the top, but the fact that you actually have BMR be more obvious (while making sense and falling withing new adjusted levels), then I think we will have done it right.

~GM Aurdun
Barbarians' Guild Advocate
Gor'Tog Co-Champion
History Guru

"Don't use logic on scientists. That's just mean." ~ GM Zeyurn