Rewriting a Bunch of Abilities

One thing I've been thinking about w/r/t wording in this game is how often the clause "this does not stack" comes up at the end of descriptions. I don't have a good solution in mind, but I know that tacking that phrase on everywhere gets to be both inefficient and, at times, misleading. Mason's Spire says it doesn't stack, but it's actually only the refund portion of its function that doesn't--the HP buff does. Little things like that could stand to be made clearer, but I'm not sure how without adding more unnecessary text.

 

Still a work in progress, added about 12 more abilities and did some further cleanup on old entries.

 

Although it is not a big deal, an ability that is on my mind is resilient. Less than (<)is not the same as less than or equal (≤) ...remember this costed me a game...

 

You could use the list of all champion spells to see any that you've missed that you think is bad.
The list is on http://s-qpoxdb.rhcloud.com/abilities/ which is a new up to date database, thanks to @LoganMkv

 

Yea, will probably be running off of that in part, once I get back on top of this. Sorta ended up overloading on projects (as usual), but this will be back on the chopping block soon. Want to finish up a short thing on Recommended BGs for new players, a theory piece on BG types, updates on the Primer and Complete Rules, and then some other personal writing and school stuff. Will get back to this soon.

 

I love this thread.

 

Semester ends in ~6 days, my life ends in ~60 years, expect an update some time in between.

 

Yes.

 

What morfeas said

 

Maybe once I get further through them, some of the diction and syntax isn't completely worked out yet, and needs the stress-testing from further application. That's my opinion, anyway.

 

Ok, I'm back at this. Want opinions on a small point (Brand is just one example):


Brand of the Outlaw -- “When this champion damages a champion using a basic attack, the damaged champion becomes Cursed for 4 turns, and gains Pariah and Liability for 4 turns.”


Should that say "damages a champion using a basic attack," or "damages a champion with a basic attack," or should the entire introductory clause see a rewrite? Saying "with a basic attack" could be interpreted to mean "hitting champion A, champion A has a basic attack" while it's hard to interpret "using" in that sense, because the opposing champion can't be attacking at the very moment it is getting attacked -- maybe "by using?" The "using" version may, however, confuse non-native speakers a bit more, because of the grammatical construction. Input desired.

 

Also, should there potentially be some grammatical distinction between terrain and TLEs? Like "become Lava" versus "become affected by DMZ/Dread Field/Fire Wall." It might be awkward and messy for some of the phrases is the problem, but it would be technically more clear.

 

Ok, that's probably a bit easier.