Originally I posted this idea in the Bard folders, but it occurred to me that its relation to Kodius's mass combat ideas meant I should post somewhere he might see. Also, while I play a Bard and would love to see something amazing like this for Bards, obviously it could be an entirely Tactics-based system, or possibly one shared among select guilds.
I imagine most people would not think of these abilities as something for Bards. Briefly, here are the reasons I was inspired to suggest this system for them: 1) the book "Remembering the Bardic Voice Volume IV", which details that Bards in Elanthia have traditionally held roles as standard bearers, 2) Bards already have access to special Warhorn abilities, 3) Bards are Tactics primary and the most likely candidates for a Tactics-primary "combat guild", 4) Bardic mojo has been renamed to Inspiration and Presence, which both seem particularly applicable when leading groups into battle, 5) Bards are uniquely focused on group combat and highly suited to situations where they throw up group spells and then use abilities to guide/maneuver the group -- other guilds are focused on damage, stealth/spying, healing, or other utility, and 6) Bards will not become an awesome combat guild until we make them one.
Warhorn Signal: Call To Arms. The Bard creates a signaling bellow on her warhorn, allowing all nearby to know precisely where she is and know that she is calling them to come to her -- quickly. Allows a hunt-like teleportation effect to the Bard, landing them in her group. Greater Tactics/Bardic Lore skill allows for a larger radius.
Warhorn Signal: Retreat. The Bard signals retreat, causing those nearby to quickly find their way out of combat. Allows anyone near the Bard and engaged to "teleport" to the Bard (as above), if they pass a retreat check, with a short period of protection from engagement afterward. Greater Tactics/Bardic Lore skill on the Bard's part allows for a bonus to the retreat check and a longer protection period.
Warhorn Signal: Attack. The Bard signals attack, causing those in her group to surge into the fray. Reduced advance time for group members.
Warhorn Signal: Rally (Offense/Defense). The Bard gives a morale-boosting blast, enhancing the offensive/defensive abilities of her group. [This one is a bit generically like lots of other abilities, but maybe something could be done to make it interesting or different -- possibly create some kind of effect vs. boss creatures only?]
Warhorn Signal: Communication. This would provide a suite of purely RP-based communicating signals, such as "All Clear" and "Rally at X Location". For example, if blown from the West Gate, people would see: "You hear three blasts of a warhorn from the West Gate, signaling the all clear there!"
Standard-bearer. The Bard bears the standard or banner of her province or city. Carrying the hefty flag significantly hinders her ability to attack and defend herself, but it grants a significant inspirational benefit to those around her. Her group spells increase in potency and duration, and all members of her group benefit from increased offensive and defensive ability. The role of the standard-bearer might also include giving battle cries and/or inspirational speeches, and may drain the Bard's Inspiration (mojo) over time.
Some of these abilities may benefit from the creation of a special type of group, call it the "war group". One could opt to be in the war group with the Bard and would then automatically experience the teleportation effects, rather than having to type in to accept them.
It would also be nice to have the ability to more readily notice when someone is forced out of your group or left behind. Like a big highlighted flag when this happens, and ASSESS GROUP gives "PrivateBob is missing!"
PRIMEQ
HABERLEJ
Re: Suggestion: Warhorn Signals
03/23/2015 05:27 PM CDT
I love these ideas, and I feel they really carve out an interesting niche for Bards in an invasion setting. Right now, I feel that Bards are, in theory, a big utility/support guild, but lack the actual muscle to make it happen at times. This is really a place that being Lore primary could be made to shine. I've heard rumors that Kodius is working on a mass combat system, and while each guild, I know, will have a slice of that pie, I would really like to see Bards taking primary on that, with Paladins having a role to play, as well as a lesser one for Warrior Mages and possibly Barbarians.
The teleportation effects and the ability to know when someone had been left out of the group with an assess would really make people seek out Bards for invasions. Furthermore, these various buffs provide greater design space. With more that players can do to work together, it opens up options for more complicated invasions that these tactics may be required to use in order to defeat. The ability to "mark" areas with warhorn blasts I would like to see accompanied by a Warrior Mage flare spell to signal as well. The end result of greater informational awareness allows greater depth in invasions.
For example, instead of critters running all over, GM's could try to sneak critters into certain locations. Towns could receive damage from attacking critters, driving players to scout more often and not bypass stragglers who aren't on the main thoroughfares. This would allow the action to rotate in all sorts of places, not just Magen Road for a Crossing example, and would incentivize people to really defend divergent locations. Oh no, Catrox's forge was damaged! It may be down for a few weeks while he gets it up and running again. We'll have to work harder next time!
Granting these further options also allows GM's to create drama by giving chokepoints an attacking force that's... shall we say extraordinarily difficult to break, allowing the critters to spread out and have to be chased down. Providing this kind of danger gives an incentive to fall back and regroup.
The teleportation effects and the ability to know when someone had been left out of the group with an assess would really make people seek out Bards for invasions. Furthermore, these various buffs provide greater design space. With more that players can do to work together, it opens up options for more complicated invasions that these tactics may be required to use in order to defeat. The ability to "mark" areas with warhorn blasts I would like to see accompanied by a Warrior Mage flare spell to signal as well. The end result of greater informational awareness allows greater depth in invasions.
For example, instead of critters running all over, GM's could try to sneak critters into certain locations. Towns could receive damage from attacking critters, driving players to scout more often and not bypass stragglers who aren't on the main thoroughfares. This would allow the action to rotate in all sorts of places, not just Magen Road for a Crossing example, and would incentivize people to really defend divergent locations. Oh no, Catrox's forge was damaged! It may be down for a few weeks while he gets it up and running again. We'll have to work harder next time!
Granting these further options also allows GM's to create drama by giving chokepoints an attacking force that's... shall we say extraordinarily difficult to break, allowing the critters to spread out and have to be chased down. Providing this kind of danger gives an incentive to fall back and regroup.
MORDAKIA1
Re: Suggestion: Warhorn Signals
03/24/2015 03:41 PM CDT
I absolutely agree with this suggestion. Bards are severely underused in the whole "party" aspect, from what I've seen. Not that I've had too much experience with it, but from what I have, having the ability to be buffed (almost) passively would be excellent for situations such as invasions. Coming to count on a certain attribute being present, and the Bard leaving which leaves me suddenly losing whatever boost I had, is really not that pleasant. This is rather important for things like vitality and fatigue.
I especially like the ideas of "Call-To-Arms," "Attack," "Retreat," and "Communication." While the first two are obviously substantial physical buffs, the RP aspect is also really awesome. Being able to sit in Crossing and see from various places at once, instead of relying on gweths (because mine break consistently since I die often) where everything is happening is an awesome idea. And tying it into to warhorns, or even potentially war drums would be epic.
On the topic of standard-bearing, I disagree. This is something that should be reserved for Paladins. However, expanding warhorns and/or war drums would eliminate the need for that, as these same bonuses and hinderances can be applied in said instance.
I especially like the ideas of "Call-To-Arms," "Attack," "Retreat," and "Communication." While the first two are obviously substantial physical buffs, the RP aspect is also really awesome. Being able to sit in Crossing and see from various places at once, instead of relying on gweths (because mine break consistently since I die often) where everything is happening is an awesome idea. And tying it into to warhorns, or even potentially war drums would be epic.
On the topic of standard-bearing, I disagree. This is something that should be reserved for Paladins. However, expanding warhorns and/or war drums would eliminate the need for that, as these same bonuses and hinderances can be applied in said instance.
PRIMEQ
Re: Suggestion: Warhorn Signals
03/25/2015 12:34 AM CDT
>>Being able to sit in Crossing and see from various places at once, instead of relying on gweths (because mine break consistently since I die often) where everything is happening is an awesome idea.
I assume you mean knowing where things are happening because you're hearing signaling blasts?
You also just made me think of an ability idea: It would be neat to see things from the other group members' perspectives. So if the war group splits temporarily, the leader could see one other member's POV, Shadewatch Mirror style, and possibly swap between members. This would help a lot with keeping track of things during invasions. Maybe it would fit best tied into Eillie's Cry (which gives a locate on death), or as a Moon Mage ability, or possibly an Empath ability with flashes of group members' state of health.
>>On the topic of standard-bearing, I disagree. This is something that should be reserved for Paladins.
It's hard for me to say because in DR, Bards are going to be what the GMs make them. I think the GMs are invested in making DR Bards different from D&D-type Bards, and obviously I think Bards could really shine with more group abilities. But ultimately I would be pretty happy if anyone got some good invasion/leadership abilities, and Paladins definitely deserve some serious leadership things as well.
If it were me, I would probably give Paladins some really good taunt/aggro control abilities, some temporary group invulnerability (with drawbacks), and abilities to move creatures around and cut through creature blockades. And yes, definitely share the standard bearing with Bards, or even have it to themselves. My vision of the two is that Paladins lead "from the front", by charging into the fray, and Bards lead "from the back", by watching the flow of battle and tactically changing positions.
I assume you mean knowing where things are happening because you're hearing signaling blasts?
You also just made me think of an ability idea: It would be neat to see things from the other group members' perspectives. So if the war group splits temporarily, the leader could see one other member's POV, Shadewatch Mirror style, and possibly swap between members. This would help a lot with keeping track of things during invasions. Maybe it would fit best tied into Eillie's Cry (which gives a locate on death), or as a Moon Mage ability, or possibly an Empath ability with flashes of group members' state of health.
>>On the topic of standard-bearing, I disagree. This is something that should be reserved for Paladins.
It's hard for me to say because in DR, Bards are going to be what the GMs make them. I think the GMs are invested in making DR Bards different from D&D-type Bards, and obviously I think Bards could really shine with more group abilities. But ultimately I would be pretty happy if anyone got some good invasion/leadership abilities, and Paladins definitely deserve some serious leadership things as well.
If it were me, I would probably give Paladins some really good taunt/aggro control abilities, some temporary group invulnerability (with drawbacks), and abilities to move creatures around and cut through creature blockades. And yes, definitely share the standard bearing with Bards, or even have it to themselves. My vision of the two is that Paladins lead "from the front", by charging into the fray, and Bards lead "from the back", by watching the flow of battle and tactically changing positions.
VOLCANUS
Re: Suggestion: Warhorn Signals
03/25/2015 09:23 AM CDT
> I think the GMs are invested in making DR Bards different from D&D-type Bards, and obviously I think Bards could really shine with more group abilities.
As much as I like this direction, how many group activities actually exist in DR that don't involve buffing the room during a class/triage?
Invasions, which feel like they should be group activities, can never truly be balanced. I wonder if the next invasion could put out some aura that caps everyone's effective ranks at ~200 or something really low. The mobs could then be balanced around that to make them harder to kill and require tactics/groups/strategy/buffs to defend against.
PRIMEQ
Re: Suggestion: Warhorn Signals
03/25/2015 03:01 PM CDT
>>As much as I like this direction, how many group activities actually exist in DR that don't involve buffing the room during a class/triage?
Well, at the moment, Bards have four "pulse to group" spells: Rage of the Clans (+offense), Naming of Tears (damage barrier), Drums of the Snake (+Agi, +locksmithing), and Redeemer's Pride (protection from Fear attacks). In addition, they can do group-only versions of enchantes like Hodierna's Lilt. That makes them currently very useful to have actually IN your group -- since all of those effects will fade if the Bard leaves.
I also find it useful to do invasions in groups because 1) we can drag each other out of danger, 2) we can advise each other, and 3) if we've managed to get a healer, we can be healed in the field (or, if there's no healer, we can tend and give herbs to each other). I led groups several times during the Dergati event and found it both useful and enjoyable. I think some of the people who joined us might have been too timid to try on their own, too.
>>Invasions, which feel like they should be group activities, can never truly be balanced.
Well, yes, I imagine it's extremely hard to balance them. But from what I understand, PVP isn't exactly balanced either. That doesn't mean we shouldn't try, and enjoy what we have in the mean time.
>>The mobs could then be balanced around that to make them harder to kill and require tactics/groups/strategy/buffs to defend against.
From my experience leading invasion groups, group tactics is currently helpful, though not required. It would definitely be interesting to see some situations deliberately set up to require groups. The difficulty there is if it becomes too hard, people become frustrated with the GMs and don't want to participate. That's part of why I want to see more group-tactics abilities released -- because then people would have the chance to practice with them and would hopefully come to know ahead of time that sometimes they are going to be necessary.
Well, at the moment, Bards have four "pulse to group" spells: Rage of the Clans (+offense), Naming of Tears (damage barrier), Drums of the Snake (+Agi, +locksmithing), and Redeemer's Pride (protection from Fear attacks). In addition, they can do group-only versions of enchantes like Hodierna's Lilt. That makes them currently very useful to have actually IN your group -- since all of those effects will fade if the Bard leaves.
I also find it useful to do invasions in groups because 1) we can drag each other out of danger, 2) we can advise each other, and 3) if we've managed to get a healer, we can be healed in the field (or, if there's no healer, we can tend and give herbs to each other). I led groups several times during the Dergati event and found it both useful and enjoyable. I think some of the people who joined us might have been too timid to try on their own, too.
>>Invasions, which feel like they should be group activities, can never truly be balanced.
Well, yes, I imagine it's extremely hard to balance them. But from what I understand, PVP isn't exactly balanced either. That doesn't mean we shouldn't try, and enjoy what we have in the mean time.
>>The mobs could then be balanced around that to make them harder to kill and require tactics/groups/strategy/buffs to defend against.
From my experience leading invasion groups, group tactics is currently helpful, though not required. It would definitely be interesting to see some situations deliberately set up to require groups. The difficulty there is if it becomes too hard, people become frustrated with the GMs and don't want to participate. That's part of why I want to see more group-tactics abilities released -- because then people would have the chance to practice with them and would hopefully come to know ahead of time that sometimes they are going to be necessary.
VOLCANUS
Re: Suggestion: Warhorn Signals
03/25/2015 03:51 PM CDT
> The difficulty there is if it becomes too hard, people become frustrated with the GMs and don't want to participate.
Does that really happen? Think back to the plague event many years ago. That started to become a nightmare, so the GMs tweaked it so that it was playable again.
With the engagement limits, you could theoretically a balanced boss mob if you could blanket normalize everyone's skills. Give them an insane amount of health. Warrior mages primarily cast from ranged. CC and tanky types could maintain the additional creatures. Empaths could try to keep the tank alive. Maybe even spread this out across multiple rooms. A couple of tanky type persons (barbarians but primarily palidins) or two would go to melee, use abilities to taunt when the other tank was dying. It opens up a brand new dynamic to the game, and a new set of abilities that could be developed for group based combat or group based survival.
Sure. PCs may lose on occasion. So they figure out why. Work out strategies. Regroup and attack. You could even put a GM on the other side, announce the day and time weeks in advance (in game threats or visions) and have some fun.
PRIMEQ
Re: Suggestion: Warhorn Signals
03/25/2015 04:32 PM CDT
>>Does that really happen? Think back to the plague event many years ago. That started to become a nightmare, so the GMs tweaked it so that it was playable again.
I don't recall that particular event, but I've found the Events GMs to be very responsive. Even still, sometimes people feel upset and take it to the boards before the GMs can hear about it. I'm thinking of a recent thread in the Events folder about the Elpalzi arrow volleys.
I think your big boss idea is interesting, I'm just skeptical about normalizing skills. People are very proud of their skills, so my guess is it wouldn't go over well. Plus it sounds like it would be a LOT of work. We've had decent success with invasions segregated by skill and I expect that's where things will remain.
I don't recall that particular event, but I've found the Events GMs to be very responsive. Even still, sometimes people feel upset and take it to the boards before the GMs can hear about it. I'm thinking of a recent thread in the Events folder about the Elpalzi arrow volleys.
I think your big boss idea is interesting, I'm just skeptical about normalizing skills. People are very proud of their skills, so my guess is it wouldn't go over well. Plus it sounds like it would be a LOT of work. We've had decent success with invasions segregated by skill and I expect that's where things will remain.
VOLCANUS
Re: Suggestion: Warhorn Signals
03/25/2015 05:15 PM CDT
> I think your big boss idea is interesting, I'm just skeptical about normalizing skills. People are very proud of their skills, so my guess is it wouldn't go over well. Plus it sounds like it would be a LOT of work. We've had decent success with invasions segregated by skill and I expect that's where things will remain.
I wonder what it would look like as a paid or other GM run quest. Not too expensive. You start off by meeting a magical wizard in need of help (trite and trope, sure, but go with me). Rather than reducing the skills, he talks about how you're not ready yet, but he can help. They just boosted every skill you have to max level (1750) and every stat to 125 (+/- for racial and guild modifiers). A sort of, imagine if, scenario. You then get to go up against a boss, maybe even a GM run boss that could respond to the dynamics of your party. They'd have recommended party make-ups, but you could bring anything you wanted to min/max or just have fun.
Technically speaking, it would just be a small script that snapshotted your character when you start the quest. Boosts everything to max, and then restored it after the boss died but before you get to open the coffers.
JHALIASCLERIC
Re: Suggestion: Warhorn Signals
03/27/2015 04:14 PM CDT
Anything that encourages more players interacting with one another or supporting one another is a good thing in my mind
HABERLEJ
Re: Suggestion: Warhorn Signals
04/02/2015 09:59 PM CDT
Regardless, there need not be any new special system in place for bosses that scale with skill or a mass combat system to implement this. It would be a cool system that would give a lot more cohesiveness to invasions and diminish the chaos by giving a tool to help people know what's going on. I actually think that with this in place, in a way it would be less work on the GM's in an invasion, even with no other system in place. Dump the enemies at various locations and allow the scouts to find them. This, in and of itself, would go a long way towards helping to solve the current problem with them feeling as if they MUST send enemies along Magen Road in the Crossing.
YOUNGS14
Re: Suggestion: Warhorn Signals
04/05/2015 03:33 PM CDT
There's some stuff I like here like the warhorn signal if it worked as like an extended range hunt. It can be pretty easy to get split up if you're trying to do an invasion with a group for various reasons like RT, engagement, etc so being able to easily assemble people again in a city area after people have dashed all over the place would be nice. Could probably help reduce but not altogether eliminate a lot of gweth chatter too and encourage more group/small party RP during an invasion.
