On 27-Feb-02 Yann Chachkoff wrote: > I suppose you imply that monsters got an infinite amount of mana. Did I ever > said they should ? (Unless, of course, the spells are "natural abilities", > like the dragon breath) No. I imply that monsters are infinite, and don't care if you kill them. Players however, have feelings, and frustration, and tend to react poorly when they think you've made something un-fun for them. Making all the cool spells backfire, does indeed accomplish what you might desire. The spells become uncool. Nobody likes to use them anymore. Look at scrolls and wands. Nobody uses them, they are neat, and they are there, but they have no advantage to players. When I said that each spell should be considered and tuned for specifically.. what I meant is, we should decide if the spell is really that bad after all, and if we will make the game less fun by removing it, because thats what you essentially do when you add a drawback. The players learn quick. "Don't cast that spell, it will blow your arm off", turns into "don't bother learning that, it's useless" and "it's too bad they ruined that spell". I realize everyone has thier balance issues, and it's a very complex thing to wrap your head around completely. But if I learned one thing from running a mud for so long, it's that players hate balance. And far far more than they hate balance, they hate it when you change the way something they've done for years works. All these things that we are encountering now... I encountered on the mud. And I implemented systems very similar to the one you are proposing.. and I regretted it, sourly. I'm just trying to pass what I learned along. It's just MHO, so, take it for what it's worth. --- Tim Rightnour < root at garbled.net > NetBSD: Free multi-architecture OS http://www.netbsd.org/ NetBSD supported hardware database: http://mail-index.netbsd.org/cgi-bin/hw.cgi