randomization of artifact numbers [Archive]

View Full Version : randomization of artifact numbers

Steve Prindeville

2nd February 2008, 12:20 PM

One problem I have seen with the randomization of artifact numbers is one side getting a Victory condition requiring that nation to end the game witha specific artifact. The Free People in that game had for victory conditions the Ring of Wind, Ring of Impersonation, and Tinculin. While we were trying to identify and find these artifacts, they knew which ones to look for and had them. Was a short game...

Note: This AAIS e-mail, including attachments, may contain confidential, privileged, or copyrighted information and the sender does not waive any related rights or obligations. Any unauthorized distribution, use, or copying of this e-mail or the information it contains is prohibited.

Wed Oct*20,*2004 3:40*pm
Show Message Info

#16576 of 19865

Msg List



<Prev

|


Next>

View Formatted Use*Fixed*Width*Font Wrap*Lines

"Steve Prindeville" <stevep@...>

sprindeville
Offline Send Email

Forward

<*Prev Message
*|*


Next Message*>

Expand Messages
Author

Sort by Date



randomization of artifact numbers

One problem I have seen with the randomization of artifact numbers is one side getting a Victory condition requiring that nation to end the game with a...

Steve Prindeville
sprindeville

Oct*20,*2004 3:44*pm



Re: randomization of artifact numbers

.... side getting a Victory condition requiring that nation to end the game with a specific artifact. The Free People in that game had for victory conditions...

Mark Jeffries
straxusii

Oct*20,*2004 10:51*pm



Re: randomization of artifact numbers

To me, I fail to see what improvement to the game that randomization of artifact numbers would have. The mere fact that they are artifacts means that they are...

kingoftherill

Oct*21,*2004 12:07*am



Re: randomization of artifact numbers

.... Once again, small changes can have huge ripples.... which is why it has been recommend that MEPBM be VERY careful making changes. Currently, they most...

Darrell Shimel
threeedgedsw...

Oct*21,*2004 12:40*am



Re: randomization of artifact numbers

Then are we back to Ed's position that the unforseen effects of any changes will be bad for the game? I've read the various positions along this line of...

kingoftherill

Oct*21,*2004 10:06*am



Re: randomization of artifact numbers

.... Not that they will automatically be bad.... I'm simply saying that even small changes can have huge effects. I agree that dragons are not handled well in...

Darrell Shimel
threeedgedsw...

Oct*21,*2004 2:32*pm



Re: randomization of artifact numbers

.... I see no difference between randomising artifacts or there powers, both have the same end result. ... To my mind this comes down to game balance, are the...

Mark Jeffries
straxusii

Oct*21,*2004 2:24*am



Re: randomization of artifact numbers

Not commenting on whether the change would be good or bad, just Mark's comment - I think the difference is that if the artifact numbers are randomized, if you...

Kevin Brown
mornhm

Oct*21,*2004 7:59*am



Re: randomization of artifact numbers

.... There are other defenses, high loyalty and forts on your capital, backups and swapping troops between multiple armies another. Mid to end game a group of...

Mark Jeffries
straxusii

Oct*21,*2004 2:31*am



Re: randomization of artifact numbers

Kevin, Its primary power determines things like combat bonus and agent/mage/emi/comm bonus. Its secondary powers are things like "allows access to spirit...

Kenneth Weed
watakshi25

Oct*21,*2004 8:13*am



Re: randomization of artifact numbers

Gurthang is Gurthang. Read about it in books. I don't want it to be a safe sailing aritfact, that's not the game I'm playing. Randomize Numbers only if you...

Brad Brunet
pbmnoot

Oct*21,*2004 8:17*am



Re: randomization of artifact numbers

Having grown up in this game without access to the internet, I am torn by the MOS boys and their actions. A group systematically gathering and publishing...

Ovatha Easterling
ovatha88@...

Oct*21,*2004 10:48*am



Re: randomization of artifact numbers

.... But balancing. Pre-MOS, some players had the info. Most did not. Newbies had FAR less of a chance then than they do now, simply because more of the...

Darrell Shimel
threeedgedsw...

Oct*21,*2004 2:34*pm



Re: randomization of artifact numbers

I support that. I HATE VCs altogether. The individual rating sucks in this game. I'be more than willing to spend somed time discussin new approaches to how to...

Rodrigo Maia
rodrigo_g0th

Oct*21,*2004 10:58*am



Re: randomization of artifact numbers

Part of the genius of this game is its ability to contain multi-levels of play within one shell. The random VCs role is encourage a level of play that amounts...

Ovatha Easterling
ovatha88@...

Oct*21,*2004 11:48*am



Re: randomization of artifact numbers

.... From: "Brad Brunet" <bbrunec296@...> To: <mepbmlist (AT) yahoogroups (DOT) com> Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2004 2:16 PM Subject: RE: [mepbmlist] Re:...

richard devereux
rjdevereux2002

Oct*21,*2004 1:28*pm



Re: randomization of artifact numbers

.... RD: No. Most 'unforseen' effects should come out during playtesting. You also seem to think that a 'changed' game will mean the death of the original....

richard devereux
rjdevereux2002

Oct*21,*2004 2:25*pm



Re: randomization of artifact numbers

he meant 412 as the spell, researsh artifact. Thats something i've also considered, like the spell being able to target three artifacts. I think secondary...

Rodrigo Maia
rodrigo_g0th

Oct*21,*2004 4:04*pm



Re: randomization of artifact numbers

.... Rendering mages as useless as they are in FA1000. Even in RA allowed you to check 3 artifacts at a time, it would take 5 mages 15 turns to identify the ...

Darrell Shimel
threeedgedsw...

Oct*21,*2004 5:16*pm



Re: randomization of artifact numbers

Thats where u're mistaken. First, nothing dictates that u have to catalog ALL the artifacts. Second, RA is an EASY spell, mind u. That means 30 mages can...

Rodrigo Maia
rodrigo_g0th

Oct*21,*2004 6:07*pm



Re: randomization of artifact numbers

.... From: "Rodrigo Maia" <g0th@...> To: <mepbmlist (AT) yahoogroups (DOT) com> Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2004 11:07 PM Subject: Re: [mepbmlist] Re: randomization...

richard devereux
rjdevereux2002

Oct*22,*2004 4:06*am



Spells

What spells would you guys like to see? Clint ... Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version:...

ME Games Ltd
harlequingam...

Oct*24,*2004 4:14*pm



Re: Spells

1 - something to combat fortifications 2 - Hide Pop Centre 3 - something to make it more difficult for enemy characters at pop centre for turn (Warding...?) 4...

Brad Brunet
pbmnoot

Oct*24,*2004 4:45*pm



Re: Spells

ScoCharHex Balance out agents w/ mages. b ... [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]...

Benjamin M. Shushan
bshushan

Oct*24,*2004 7:30*pm



Re: Spells

Is it possible now to have different, period based, sets of spells?. Didier From: ME Games Ltd <me@...> Reply-To: mepbmlist (AT) yahoogroups (DOT) com ...

.. XIII
xiii_bis@...

Oct*25,*2004 2:55*am



Re: Spells

It could be. Clint ... ************************************************** ************** ME Games Ltd me@... www.middleearthgames.com UK:...

ME Games Ltd
harlequingam...

Oct*25,*2004 8:43*am



Re: Spells

Three that come to mind are : a character "ensnare" spell - leaves the character in place immune to other character's actions but unable to cast orders other...

Kevin Brown
mornhm

Oct*25,*2004 8:46*am



Re: Spells

Yeah. what if mages could "inspire competence "? Such as giving a + 10 bonus to a character for his next action..> Just a thought. If it's agreed that the...

Rodrigo Maia
rodrigo_g0th

Oct*25,*2004 11:46*am



Re: Spells

.... Seems fine. ... That would be cool. ... I don't agree with this (espy 1650 where armies is where it's at IMO) but that's by the by. Clint ... Outgoing mail...

ME Games Ltd
harlequingam...

Oct*25,*2004 12:05*pm

Mark Jeffries

2nd February 2008, 12:20 PM

> One problem I have seen with the randomization of artifact numbers is one
side getting a Victory condition requiring that nation to end the game with
a specific artifact. The Free People in that game had for victory
conditions the Ring of Wind, Ring of Impersonation, and Tinculin. While we
were trying to identify and find these artifacts, they knew which ones to
look for and had them. Was a short game...

Indeed.

To my mind the problem with randomising artifacts is that it reduces skill
and increases luck in the game. Sure the side that commits the most mages to
researching and finding artifacts will tend to get more of the good
artifacts but if both sides commit the same resource it is then down to pure
luck as to who gets Tinc or ROW. I have only played one FA game but my side
got ROW, ROI and ROC ! (As I recall one of our victory conditions was to
hold one of these though)

If all id's are known then who obtains the ROW is more down to skillful play
(and of course some luck).

regards

Mark

kingoftherill

2nd February 2008, 12:20 PM

To me, I fail to see what improvement to the game that randomization
of artifact numbers would have. The mere fact that they are artifacts
means that they are known and that legends and histories about them
would have been passed down. To me it would seem more logical to
randomize secondary powers so that you don't always know exactly what
you have when you get it and would have to then cast research
artifact on the toy once you got it to have a more clear picture of
what you really have.

The biggest thing I think needs to be worked over is the dragons.
Dragons are capricious and should be moody and unpredictable. It
seems unreasonable to me that everyone should know exactly how every
dragon is going to react whenever you encounter them. I think it
would be more reasonable to randomize the responses of dragons for
every game. That way every initial encounter with a dragon would be
fraught with peril and fear. It would then take great courage on the
part of the player to recruit the dragon instead of the virtual
slaves we now have in dragons. Nations like the Dragon Lord could be
given special advantages such as their characters are never killed by
a dragon encounter injured but not killed. This would make them more
the specialist in hunting dragons for service which is the way it
should be. To simply shuffle the reactions would only be a short term
fix as the information will be distributed pretty quickly. Every game
having newly randomized dragon personalities would make them an
awsome and fear instilling agent which they are in the books.

My two cents.

-- In mepbmlist (AT) yahoogroups (DOT) com, "Steve Prindeville" <stevep@a...>
wrote:
> One problem I have seen with the randomization of artifact numbers
is one side getting a Victory condition requiring that nation to end
the game with a specific artifact. The Free People in that game had
for victory conditions the Ring of Wind, Ring of Impersonation, and
Tinculin. While we were trying to identify and find these artifacts,
they knew which ones to look for and had them. Was a short game...
>

> Note: This AAIS e-mail, including attachments, may contain
confidential, privileged, or copyrighted information and the sender
does not waive any related rights or obligations. Any unauthorized
distribution, use, or copying of this e-mail or the information it
contains is prohibited.

Mark Jeffries

2nd February 2008, 12:20 PM

Kevin Brown

2nd February 2008, 12:20 PM

Not commenting on whether the change would be good or bad, just
Mark's comment -

I think the difference is that if the artifact numbers are
randomized, if you have a nation victory condition for a certain
artifact you know the random number in advance. If the artifact
powers are random, just because you pick up the ring of wind, you
don't know that you are getting an agent artifact. Might be a combat
or ???. Randomizing secondary powers wouldn't have the same effect
either. Most artifacts are grabbed for their primary powers anyway.

My .02
Kevin
> I see no difference between randomising artifacts or there powers,
both have the same end result.
>

kingoftherill

2nd February 2008, 12:20 PM

Then are we back to Ed's position that the unforseen effects of any
changes will be bad for the game?

I've read the various positions along this line of thought especially
those in the last day. I agree with Brad Brunet certain artifacts are
well known. I do not agree with the position that most artifacts are
picked up for their primary powers. Most of the Curse artifacts have
that power for their secondary power. They are picked up either to
get access or deny the enemy access to those powers. I know we have
picked up artifacts simply to get the ability to teleport which had
nothing to do with its primary power.

Maybe it is just me, but I find it absurd that a DS can simply camp
on a hex if you know the right one, and recruit the dragon when he
returns every single time. I am not addressing balance here. If we
were then there are lots of issues. Not just dragons, or artifacts.
My comment is that to me the knowlege everyone has on every dragon is
simply out of reason. Dragons have personalities in Tolkiens writings
they are not predictable but in our game they are completely so.

Brad

--- In mepbmlist (AT) yahoogroups (DOT) com, Darrell Shimel
<threeedgedsword35@y...> wrote:
> > To me, I fail to see what improvement to the game
> > that randomization
> > of artifact numbers would have. The mere fact that
> > they are artifacts
> > means that they are known and that legends and
> > histories about them
> > would have been passed down. To me it would seem
> > more logical to
> > randomize secondary powers so that you don't always
> > know exactly what
> > you have when you get it and would have to then cast
> > research
> > artifact on the toy once you got it to have a more
> > clear picture of
> > what you really have.
>
> Once again, small changes can have huge ripples....
> which is why it has been recommend that MEPBM be VERY
> careful making changes.
>
> Currently, they most effective defense to the agent on
> slaught, is the curse squad.
>
> Something as simple as randomizing the secondary
> powers of artifacts would eliminate the ability to
> effectivly use curse squads. With a couple hundred
> artifacts, it would take 20 turns for 10 mages to
> identify which artifacts give access to SM.
>
> It is the lack of SM artifacts in 1000 that mages so
> utterly useless. This is a big part of the reason
> that the game is such an agent shoot-out, and is also
> the least popular of the 3 scenarios.
>
>
> > The biggest thing I think needs to be worked over is
> > the dragons.
> > Dragons are capricious and should be moody and
> > unpredictable.
>
> Again, a small change can have a huge effect. Dragons
> are a major balance in 1650 to the massive FP economic
> advantage. There would no longer be a major reason
> for DS to stay active in the Misties. There would no
> longer be a reason for the FP to really care about
> rooting the DS out of the Misties.
>
> Something as simple as randomizing the dragon
> responses would have huge ripples through the game.
>
>
>
>

richard devereux

2nd February 2008, 12:20 PM

> To me, I fail to see what improvement to the game that randomization
> of artifact numbers would have. The mere fact that they are artifacts
> means that they are known and that legends and histories about them
> would have been passed down. To me it would seem more logical to
> randomize secondary powers so that you don't always know exactly what
> you have when you get it and would have to then cast research
> artifact on the toy once you got it to have a more clear picture of
> what you really have.

RD: Yes, which also means that RA actually becomes a useful order!
>
> The biggest thing I think needs to be worked over is the dragons.
> Dragons are capricious and should be moody and unpredictable. It
> seems unreasonable to me that everyone should know exactly how every
> dragon is going to react whenever you encounter them. I think it
> would be more reasonable to randomize the responses of dragons for
> every game. That way every initial encounter with a dragon would be
> fraught with peril and fear. It would then take great courage on the
> part of the player to recruit the dragon instead of the virtual
> slaves we now have in dragons. Nations like the Dragon Lord could be
> given special advantages such as their characters are never killed by
> a dragon encounter injured but not killed. This would make them more
> the specialist in hunting dragons for service which is the way it
> should be. To simply shuffle the reactions would only be a short term
> fix as the information will be distributed pretty quickly. Every game
> having newly randomized dragon personalities would make them an
> awsome and fear instilling agent which they are in the books.
>
> My two cents.

RD: In principle, you're right, but if Harle put it into practice it would
upset game balance. In 1650 the DS would be well and truly stuffed without
their recruitable dragons.

Richard.
>
>
>
> -- In mepbmlist (AT) yahoogroups (DOT) com, "Steve Prindeville" <stevep@a...>
> wrote:
> > One problem I have seen with the randomization of artifact numbers
> is one side getting a Victory condition requiring that nation to end
> the game with a specific artifact. The Free People in that game had
> for victory conditions the Ring of Wind, Ring of Impersonation, and
> Tinculin. While we were trying to identify and find these artifacts,
> they knew which ones to look for and had them. Was a short game...
> >
>
>
>
>
> > Note: This AAIS e-mail, including attachments, may contain
> confidential, privileged, or copyrighted information and the sender
> does not waive any related rights or obligations. Any unauthorized
> distribution, use, or copying of this e-mail or the information it
> contains is prohibited.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Middle Earth PBM - hit reply to send to everyone
> To Unsubscribe: http://www.yahoogroups.com
> Website: http://www.MiddleEarthGames.com
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

richard devereux

2nd February 2008, 12:20 PM

> Then are we back to Ed's position that the unforseen effects of any
> changes will be bad for the game?

RD: No. Most 'unforseen' effects should come out during playtesting. You
also seem to think that a 'changed' game will mean the death of the
original. Why should that be so? If Clint has any sense (and I'm sure he
has or Harle wouldn't have made the progress it has) the original game would
be run alongside the changeling. If it becomes clear that players prefer
one, then the other can then be dropped. If both are popular, Harle can
continue to run both. A game which is genuinely improved may attract former
players of ME back into the fold, enlarging the player base. ME is not
perfect - it has its share of faults, some of which have caused players to
quit in search of newer more sophisticated games. ME never will be perfect,
but Clint and his staff MUST constantly strive for perfection to keep
interest alive and to attract new players.

If ME doesn't change it will eventually wither and die, as the people who've
been playing it for decades do the same thing.

Steam locomotives are magnificent machines. They still work, and they still
look great, but you don't see many left on today's railways. They are kept
going in a few places by a bunch of enthusiasts, but they are not
financially viable as a large-scale commercial enterprise. If the ME game
is to flourish, it too needs to move with the times.

Richard.
>
> I've read the various positions along this line of thought especially
> those in the last day. I agree with Brad Brunet certain artifacts are
> well known. I do not agree with the position that most artifacts are
> picked up for their primary powers. Most of the Curse artifacts have
> that power for their secondary power. They are picked up either to
> get access or deny the enemy access to those powers. I know we have
> picked up artifacts simply to get the ability to teleport which had
> nothing to do with its primary power.
>
> Maybe it is just me, but I find it absurd that a DS can simply camp
> on a hex if you know the right one, and recruit the dragon when he
> returns every single time. I am not addressing balance here. If we
> were then there are lots of issues. Not just dragons, or artifacts.
> My comment is that to me the knowlege everyone has on every dragon is
> simply out of reason. Dragons have personalities in Tolkiens writings
> they are not predictable but in our game they are completely so.
>
> Brad
>
RD: You are right, but you admit you have not addressed the question of game
balance. If you take away dragons' predictability - which on the face of it
is a reasonable suggestion - you need to give the DS some other advantage in
compensation.

How about DS don't have to pay maintenance for their troops? I mean, can
you imagine Sauron dipping into his hoard to actually PAY his troops?

Richard.
> --- In mepbmlist (AT) yahoogroups (DOT) com, Darrell Shimel
> <threeedgedsword35@y...> wrote:
> > > To me, I fail to see what improvement to the game
> > > that randomization
> > > of artifact numbers would have. The mere fact that
> > > they are artifacts
> > > means that they are known and that legends and
> > > histories about them
> > > would have been passed down. To me it would seem
> > > more logical to
> > > randomize secondary powers so that you don't always
> > > know exactly what
> > > you have when you get it and would have to then cast
> > > research
> > > artifact on the toy once you got it to have a more
> > > clear picture of
> > > what you really have.
> >
> > Once again, small changes can have huge ripples....
> > which is why it has been recommend that MEPBM be VERY
> > careful making changes.
> >
> > Currently, they most effective defense to the agent on
> > slaught, is the curse squad.
> >
> > Something as simple as randomizing the secondary
> > powers of artifacts would eliminate the ability to
> > effectivly use curse squads. With a couple hundred
> > artifacts, it would take 20 turns for 10 mages to
> > identify which artifacts give access to SM.
> >
> > It is the lack of SM artifacts in 1000 that mages so
> > utterly useless. This is a big part of the reason
> > that the game is such an agent shoot-out, and is also
> > the least popular of the 3 scenarios.
> >
> >
> > > The biggest thing I think needs to be worked over is
> > > the dragons.
> > > Dragons are capricious and should be moody and
> > > unpredictable.
> >
> > Again, a small change can have a huge effect. Dragons
> > are a major balance in 1650 to the massive FP economic
> > advantage. There would no longer be a major reason
> > for DS to stay active in the Misties. There would no
> > longer be a reason for the FP to really care about
> > rooting the DS out of the Misties.
> >
> > Something as simple as randomizing the dragon
> > responses would have huge ripples through the game.
> >
> >
> >
> >

Sam Roads

2nd February 2008, 12:20 PM

ME Games Ltd

2nd February 2008, 12:20 PM

One idea for 412 might be that it would have a range of spell IDs to
research. Eg 940 412, 1-5 (or 940 412 1 and then you'd 412 the next say
upto 5 items).

Hence teams with the most resources allocated to such would be
advantaged. I'm aware that it adds an element of randomness to the game
that I'm not 100% happy about so ideas on how to counter that would be useful.

Also 585 might pick up one 412 ids, as well as what it does.

With this and similar ideas for change I'd just like to discuss with you
guys and see what comes up as being a good idea.

Changing Dragons would have a massive impact and I'm not sure that we'd
want to do that.

Clint

> > To me, I fail to see what improvement to the game that randomization
> > of artifact numbers would have. The mere fact that they are artifacts
> > means that they are known and that legends and histories about them
> > would have been passed down. To me it would seem more logical to
> > randomize secondary powers so that you don't always know exactly what
> > you have when you get it and would have to then cast research
> > artifact on the toy once you got it to have a more clear picture of
> > what you really have.
>
>RD: Yes, which also means that RA actually becomes a useful order!

----------

---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.782 / Virus Database: 528 - Release Date: 22/10/04

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

ME Games Ltd

2nd February 2008, 12:20 PM

>As a complete newbie (just playing in my first game currently) to the
>game, it seems to me that the DS have most of the advantages. Most of the
>game results I have seen point to the DS winning most 1650 and 2950
>games. If this is the case, would that not point to the game being
>slanted towards the DS?

Mostly this is because the FPs are run by newer, less team orientated
players. That accounts for 90% of the win ratio I'd say. Note 2950 the
FPs are the most popular side and they're the ones that win more often. In
1650 it's about 55-60% in favour of the DS.

>I guess my suggestions for improvement would be the following:
>1) Do not allow agents to refuse a challenge at an enemy pop
>center. This one boggles my mind, I have seen players have a C70+
>kidnapped by an agent at his capital with a loyalty of 80+ with guard
>(don't remember the rank), and the commander challenged the agent. What
>more could this player have done?

Check out my article on Agents in Bree - it suggests a lot of what you can do.

>2) Randomizing the dragon responses is a good idea. Otherwise, all it
>comes down to is camping at a hex and delivering the right response. When
>this game first started, no one had all the answers to everything, but
>things still worked out. As it is now, all recruiting dragons comes down
>to is knowing where to look to get the list of correct responses. To me,
>this does not reflect skill in the game.

FPs that are on the ball can do a lot about this. Personally I think the
FP have the advantage in 1650 but that's just my opinion.

Clint

----------

---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.782 / Virus Database: 528 - Release Date: 22/10/04

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Brad Brunet

2nd February 2008, 12:20 PM

----- Original Message -----
From: "ME Games Ltd" <me@...
>
> Also 585 might pick up one 412 ids, as well as what it does.

Doesn't 585 already pick up VC's? So for the nation who starts the game
knowing that the Ring of Wind is arty 41 this game, by turn 10 everyone else
should to...(dang accountants out there...tabulating everything...)

Brad

Brad Brunet

2nd February 2008, 12:20 PM

----- Original Message -----
From: "ME Games Ltd" <me@...
> Note 2950 the
> FPs are the most popular side and they're the ones that win more often.

Soooo.... You're saying I'm an unpopular loser...?

Stewie 233

richard devereux

2nd February 2008, 12:20 PM

----- Original Message -----
From: "ME Games Ltd" <me@...>
To: <mepbmlist (AT) yahoogroups (DOT) com>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2004 10:02 PM
Subject: [mepbmlist] Research Artefact

>
> One idea for 412 might be that it would have a range of spell IDs to
> research. Eg 940 412, 1-5 (or 940 412 1 and then you'd 412 the next say
> upto 5 items).
>
> Hence teams with the most resources allocated to such would be
> advantaged. I'm aware that it adds an element of randomness to the game
> that I'm not 100% happy about so ideas on how to counter that would be
useful.

RD: What exactly are you trying to achieve here? Everybody knows, or can
look up, the secondary powers anyway, so they still won't use the spell -
unless you are going to randomize the secondary powers?

If you randomize secondary powers, the biggest problem concerns the Spirit
Mastery artis. Building a curse squad or two is one way the FP can counter
the DS agent advantage. Some teams build their strategy around finding ALL
the spirit artis so that their opponents cannot create a curse squad.
Randomizing will kill that idea.

Also, there are currently (in 1650) a total of 6 Spriti artis: 2 neutral,
three evil (one of which starts with WiK) and one good. Will the
randomizing keep the same number of spirit artis in each alignment? Will
the randomizing leave WiK - or at least one DS - with a spirit arti at
start? The answers to both questions should be yes, otherwise you risk
uspetting game balance.

Alternatively, you need to introduce a new spell which would enable mages to
hunt down the nearest art with a given scondary power. This would need to
be a 'hard' spell equivelant to LAT. The difference is that the mage would
not know the primary power of the arti unless/until he found it. Also the
spell should have the option to specify alignment as well as the secondary
power; if none is specificed then the spell reveals the location of the
nearest such arti of any alignment.

Richard.

> > > The mere fact that they are artifacts
> > > means that they are known and that legends and histories about them
> > > would have been passed down. To me it would seem more logical to
> > > randomize secondary powers so that you don't always know exactly what
> > > you have when you get it and would have to then cast research
> > > artifact on the toy once you got it to have a more clear picture of
> > > what you really have.