(Editor's note: one response has been edited for clarity. These changes are denoted by [square brackets].)
What is your motivation for writing proposals?
To make the Omnibus a better document. I don't have very many objections with regards to game balance right now, though I think casters might be a tad too powerful. The document itself could be better written to better present the information it has. I considered trying to do something with necromancy this year to make things cleaner, but I'm hoping for some short meetings instead.
If I remember correctly, you've served on the Omnibus Editorial Committee several times. What, in your opinion, is the difference between the things the OEC can clarify and the things that should go through the EHC process?
The OEC can't clarify rules. If there an ambiguous interpretation of a rule, it has to go to the EHC to be clarified. The one exception I see is when a proposal was passed, and the wording is ambiguous. In that instance, with guidance from the person who wrote the proposal, the OEC can clarify the text. If something is caught a year or more later, or if a proposal has an unintended side effect, the OEC can't clarify those problems.
How do you feel about the wording of a proposal being fixed during the discussion of it during the Player's Meeting or the Event Holder's Council? Do you find it more or less preferable to the OEC editing the text after the proposal has passed?
Depends on context. I'm generally in favour of giving more freedom to the OEC, so I'll often suggest that wording can be fixed by the OEC, but a lot of the amendments made at the meetings impact the rules being voted on, so those discussions should stay at the meetings.
You mentioned game balance earlier. When you're reading proposals, how do you determine if the proposed changes will have a positive or negative impact on game balance?
I have gut feelings about what things are a little too strong and what things are a little too weak. I'm not perfect on this. If a lot of people are currently doing a thing, it's likely too powerful. If hardly anybody is doing a thing, it's likely too weak. I see a higher ratio of casters to fighters than I'd like to see, so I suspect the current magic system is too strong. It's been that way for a few years. I don't see many two paths. I think that means a bow and a weapon shorter than 3'8" don't make up for what you can get from a third path of spells. Given that I think casters are a little too strong, I'd prefer to nerf three paths instead of buffing two paths.
Of course, not everything popular is too powerful. Our game would be fundamentally different if Heal Limb were a spell that most casters didn't have. Heal Limb is an example of a powerful spell at a low circle that should probably stay as it is.
Are there any other proposals this year that are particularly interesting to you?
I'm curious to see what happens with the scalping/death proposals. The undead revamp is interesting, and I have not yet decided how I feel about it. Of course, it might depend on what you mean by "interesting". I don't think any of my proposals are interesting, but I certainly hope they all pass.
For some of the proposals I [want] to fail, it's possible amendments will make me change my mind. For some of the proposals I [want] to pass, I have amendments in mind that I hope are made, and I might vote against them without those amendments. It's not a perfect system.
If you had the power to change, add, or remove anything from the Omnibus, what would you do?
I'd reformat and reorganise it. I guess if you really want to pick a rule change, I'd go with taking Familiar out?
Can you give me one or two examples of what you would do to reorganize?
I have a proposal to take Regional Magic and Alchemy out of the sections they're currently in and make a new section for them. If I had the power to do so, I'd look around more and do a more drastic reorg.
What about Familiar? Why would you take it out?
I've never liked the spell. It's mostly just better buydowns. Now that buydowns aren't as much a thing, it's no longer too powerful, but it's purpose went away.
Before I wrap this up, is there anything you would like to say or talk about regarding proposals?
What is your motivation for writing proposals?
To make the Omnibus a better document. I don't have very many objections with regards to game balance right now, though I think casters might be a tad too powerful. The document itself could be better written to better present the information it has. I considered trying to do something with necromancy this year to make things cleaner, but I'm hoping for some short meetings instead.
If I remember correctly, you've served on the Omnibus Editorial Committee several times. What, in your opinion, is the difference between the things the OEC can clarify and the things that should go through the EHC process?
The OEC can't clarify rules. If there an ambiguous interpretation of a rule, it has to go to the EHC to be clarified. The one exception I see is when a proposal was passed, and the wording is ambiguous. In that instance, with guidance from the person who wrote the proposal, the OEC can clarify the text. If something is caught a year or more later, or if a proposal has an unintended side effect, the OEC can't clarify those problems.
How do you feel about the wording of a proposal being fixed during the discussion of it during the Player's Meeting or the Event Holder's Council? Do you find it more or less preferable to the OEC editing the text after the proposal has passed?
Depends on context. I'm generally in favour of giving more freedom to the OEC, so I'll often suggest that wording can be fixed by the OEC, but a lot of the amendments made at the meetings impact the rules being voted on, so those discussions should stay at the meetings.
You mentioned game balance earlier. When you're reading proposals, how do you determine if the proposed changes will have a positive or negative impact on game balance?
I have gut feelings about what things are a little too strong and what things are a little too weak. I'm not perfect on this. If a lot of people are currently doing a thing, it's likely too powerful. If hardly anybody is doing a thing, it's likely too weak. I see a higher ratio of casters to fighters than I'd like to see, so I suspect the current magic system is too strong. It's been that way for a few years. I don't see many two paths. I think that means a bow and a weapon shorter than 3'8" don't make up for what you can get from a third path of spells. Given that I think casters are a little too strong, I'd prefer to nerf three paths instead of buffing two paths.
Of course, not everything popular is too powerful. Our game would be fundamentally different if Heal Limb were a spell that most casters didn't have. Heal Limb is an example of a powerful spell at a low circle that should probably stay as it is.
Are there any other proposals this year that are particularly interesting to you?
I'm curious to see what happens with the scalping/death proposals. The undead revamp is interesting, and I have not yet decided how I feel about it. Of course, it might depend on what you mean by "interesting". I don't think any of my proposals are interesting, but I certainly hope they all pass.
For some of the proposals I [want] to fail, it's possible amendments will make me change my mind. For some of the proposals I [want] to pass, I have amendments in mind that I hope are made, and I might vote against them without those amendments. It's not a perfect system.
If you had the power to change, add, or remove anything from the Omnibus, what would you do?
I'd reformat and reorganise it. I guess if you really want to pick a rule change, I'd go with taking Familiar out?
Can you give me one or two examples of what you would do to reorganize?
I have a proposal to take Regional Magic and Alchemy out of the sections they're currently in and make a new section for them. If I had the power to do so, I'd look around more and do a more drastic reorg.
What about Familiar? Why would you take it out?
I've never liked the spell. It's mostly just better buydowns. Now that buydowns aren't as much a thing, it's no longer too powerful, but it's purpose went away.
Before I wrap this up, is there anything you would like to say or talk about regarding proposals?
Nah, I'm good
Thanks for your time
You're welcome
Pi Fisher is an Event Holder and member of the 2018 Omnibus Editorial Committee, as well as the author of several proposals which clean up the Omnibus. To see his and other proposals, visit https://www.realmsnet.net/proposals.