>>I cant wait to see the new systems (expertise and endurance) for endurance, although I certainly hope that Lore Primaries would get some unique tactics stuff as well. Was I a tactics primary I would feel a bit miffed if a tactics tert got nicer tactics capabilities than I do.

I could possibly see working some tiered skillset bonus into the tactics system, but expertise and endurance are not justification for such. They are unrelated, and just happen to function similarly.

>>This is fair, but at the same time, it's the argument that was used to limit productive development for Lore Prime guilds for years. The entire purpose of creating Tactics was to ensure every skillset had at least one important combat skill -- which necessarily means that every guild, even Barbarians, will have aspects of combat they're great at training and other aspects they have difficulty with. So I can understand being a little concerned that the first big new Tactics system comes with built-in tie-ins for the two old "frontline combat" guilds, neither of whom are that great at tactics according to skillset -- and is specifically planned to let them leverage skills they ARE good at instead! Think of it as using Vocals in combat.

Paladins would be quite fine at Tactics, if you consider secondary a baseline for comparison.

I still think the two are completely unrelated. Expertise is mechanically going to be similar to tactics, but that's where the comparison ends. Arguments about development history or giving lore guilds something special are irrelevant. Like Vin said, that would be like a barbarian getting angry that Thieves have a special weapon attack (in their primary skillset nonetheless) or anyone with augmentation in their sphere of influence getting angry that Moon Mages get a guild-specific ability to buff that works outside the magic system.

Lore primaries already have an advantage in that tactics is now a very desirable skill. If you'd like to see a skillset-based perk for it, that's fine, request such in the combat or lore folders. QQing about upcoming guild-specific abilities isn't the way to do it, though, because expertise isn't letting barbarians "ignore tactics" any more than Bardic Lore allows Bards to "ignore tm."

>>Lore primaries already have an advantage in that tactics is now a very desirable skill. If you'd like to see a skillset-based perk for it, that's fine, request such in the combat or lore folders. QQing about upcoming guild-specific abilities isn't the way to do it, though, because expertise isn't letting barbarians "ignore tactics" any more than Bardic Lore allows Bards to "ignore tm."

I already have posted suggestions in the Bard folders, as a matter of fact. But I don't see any harm in commenting on an argument I disagree with, as well. Also, those Bard screams? Are getting changed to use TM.

Barbarian have IF abilities as Necro's have Risen. You point was irrelevant. Having a system that every guild can utilize to more than the basic interpretation being built so everyone can use it to their specialty in no way affects anyone beyond what you believe a guild should.

Denying guilds the use of a skill because you feel that you got gypped on something doesn't necessarily mean you did. No ones asking for anything on an equal footing to the depth of the skills you're getting. Allowing a system to utilize the skills given to guilds is by no means far fetched and given entitlement. Making a system everyone can enjoy based on the guild they enjoy playing sounds more enjoyable then going... Ah Tactics. This lore skill that Barbs and Paladins get some great enjoyment out of because they somehow are the leaders of combat is complete crap. They might get perks but so should other guilds.

>>Barbarian have IF abilities as Necro's have Risen. You point was irrelevant.

Inner fire abilities are comparable to Necro magic, not Risen. Every guild gets buffs, Barbarians are not somehow special in this regard. Risen are a direct result of Thanatology, which is the Necromancer guild-only skill. In this way it is comparable to expertise, which is the barbarian guild-only skill.

>>They might get perks but so should other guilds.

1. The game is littered with perks: skillset perks, SOI perks, guild-only perks, even random "it makes sense for them" perks like throwing blades or dual load. Many of these are not neatly distributed so it's "fair" for everyone. Name your guild. If you answered any guild that exists in the game, that guild already has lots of perks.

2. Giving paladins and barbarians their own tactics-like system is not "favoring them." It's not being "unequal." What you are not taking into account is that every guild except barbarians and paladins already have guild-only skills; giving them these skills does not "favor" them, it's simply correcting an inequality that already exists. The fact that those guild skills will be tied into tactics is simply coincidence, and does not somehow make it more or less fair than any other guild-specific skill.

>>No one knows exactly how much Expertise or Endurance is going to play into this system. We also don't know how much other guilds are going to get. But this system is being created for the grand purpose of allowing harder bosses to be created and brought down. Limiting guilds on this system sounds like a bad system. Its basically telling all Battle Empaths that don't enjoy Shock that their only purpose in group combat is to utilize their healing capabilities and or their Guardian Spirit. Its telling every magic using guild out their(Currently, perhaps theres plans to add magic usage into the combo system) that to keep up the combo system that they need to focus on utilizing their melee capabilites (Yes this system ONLY uses melee as a usage currently) when they rolled the guild they did to use Magic perhaps more than swords and daggers. Im saying that this system could be 10x what it is currently and you're telling me that you don't want to see it expanded on. Im confused why we should limit a system that can make the combat system in DR the most advanced combat system I have ever seen designed into a pigeonholed system because certain guilds should only get the better end of the stick.

Jesus dude, you really need to drink a coke and calm down. Firstly, please use more paragraph breaks? Secondly, you're QQing a ton about two abilities and a boss system that aren't even released yet.

Tactics is a very nice development but it's hardly some sort of game-breaking rule-all development like you're making it out to be. As a Cleric player, I'm pretty sure Clerics will be quite fine without their own clerical tactics perks. Since, you know, they can already use tactics like everyone else, on top of their own guild-only skill and 40+ spells.

>>The few people that have commented on inequalities are stating that its somehow correcting something thats not there I want Barbarians and Paladins to ALSO get something else. Your skill is being developed and its going to have play into Tactics in increasing the effectiveness of the debuffs among other things (Own special combos, etc). There is no reason that this shouldn't transfer over to other guilds as well because this I feel is creating inequalities. Allowing this to play over into the other guilds would create a more robust system that everyone could enjoy based on the guild they chose.

>>It shouldn't stop because Barbarians and Paladins should be the only ones with perks in the system is all I am saying. I don't feel that TACTICS should somehow be the stopping ground for the Barbarian/Paladins new guild-only skill. Every guild should have some additional play in the system that is dependent on their guild.

That's fine. I'm not arguing against expansion of Tactics. My point is that Expertise and Endurance are not Tactics, they are guild-only skills, so they should not be taken into account when you start arguing about barbs/paladins getting "perks" for tactics where other guilds don't. They're not getting tactics perks, because these skills are not tactics.

My apologies for having my post end up below yours now. My work computer apparently posts before I can finish as I walk away from it to do something before finalizing my post.

Your guild only abilities getting tied into tactics is simply due to the fact that its new and related to combat. Its only training method shouldn't be specific to tactics. If it is that is short sighted and should be corrected.

>2. Giving paladins and barbarians their own tactics-like system is not "favoring them." It's not being "unequal." What you are not taking into account is that every guild except barbarians and paladins already have guild-only skills; giving them these skills does not "favor" them, it's simply correcting an inequality that already exists. The fact that those guild skills will be tied into tactics is simply coincidence, and does not somehow make it more or less fair than any other guild-specific skill.

The few people that have commented on inequalities are stating that its somehow correcting something that's not there. I want Barbarians and Paladins to ALSO get something else. Your guild-only skill having a tie into tactics is a coincidence and I agree with what you stated above. There is no reason that this shouldn't transfer over to other guilds as well because this I feel is creating inequalities. Allowing this to play over into the other guilds would create a more robust system that everyone could enjoy based on the guild they chose.

>1. The game is littered with perks: skillset perks, SOI perks, guild-only perks, even random "it makes sense for them" perks like throwing blades or dual load. Many of these are not neatly distributed so it's "fair" for everyone. Name your guild. If you answered any guild that exists in the game, that guild already has lots of perks.

Im pretty sure the perks of dual load and throwing blades has shifted and is going to become feats(Minus Rangers still having dual load via a spell, unless this has changed as well).

I'm not asking for these things now or when Expertise/Endurance is released, I am perfectly happy waiting for these things after Barbarians and Paladins have their skill expanded on even.

>Tactics is a very nice development but it's hardly some sort of game-breaking rule-all development like you're making it out to be. As a Cleric player, I'm pretty sure Clerics will be quite fine without their own clerical tactics perks. Since, you know, they can already use tactics like everyone else, on top of their own guild-only skill and 40+ spells.

I'm not saying no one CANT enjoy the system or otherwise. I do believe that this system is ending up to have a huge play into Combat(Something that the vast majority of players enjoy) as well as Invasions and Wars once the system is properly in place. What I would like to see is to have these things tied into the system to create more maneuvers, more tactics, and more strategy for a group to have fun in combat together. Moon-mages being able to do a combo that includes astrology that buffs the groups OFF or DEF. Bards having a combo that uses a scream or something else to help the group or debuff the critters. These are things that the long term goal of the system should provide. It shouldn't stop because Barbarians and Paladins should be the only ones with perks in the system is all I am saying. I don't feel that TACTICS should somehow be the stopping ground for the Barbarian/Paladins new guild-only skill. Every guild should have some additional play in the system that is dependent on their guild.

Barbarians and Paladins should get additional things tied into their new guild-only skills that are separate from the tactics system, not tied directly into it. Im basically asking for a more robust tactics system (Which I feel most people would appreciate). If people don't want these things then sure, I can stop caring about the system going anywhere. But as a player of multiple guilds I don't see how you think this is a bad idea.

You also say that Endurance and Expertise are not justifications for these things. I feel they are. They are directly connected. Why? Because these two systems are creating additional things specific to these two guilds into the tactics system. Something that is completely separate from the two guilds and only connected because their skills are expanding the tactics system directly.

I'm not here to fight or belittle. I'm just hoping that everyone can see that this system can provide these things across the board for everyone and these two systems are the starting ground for the systems to be crossed over into other guilds as well.

>>Which would directly be a perk to the tactics system no?

No. No moreso than predictions are directly a perk to the Augmentation/Debilitations skills, or Backstab is directly a perk to the Small Edges skill.

And even if you would argue that they are, fine. So what? Barbarians do not get a Small Edges perk to compensate for the fact that Thieves have Backstab, and I think it's silly to argue that they are entitled to such a perk.

>>Barbarians and Paladins should get additional things tied into their new guild-only skills that are separate from the tactics system, not tied directly into it.

Why not?

You're throwing out all these ideas and assuming it's the best thing for everyone. It's fine to have opinions, but when you try to justify calling Endurance/Expertise complete crap because your idea of how the system should be isn't the way it is now then yeah, you're coming across really erratic.

---

Individuals, families, countries, continents are destroyed at the heavy hand of Vinjince.

-GM Abasha

>>I guess I will have to agree to disagree. I feel that specific perk is designed around the lore/SOI of the guild and specific to the fact that they're stealthy(Something Barb's aren't a master on).

Well, of course. It's hard to argue expertise matches Barbarian lore/SOI because it hasn't been developed yet, though. Whatever it is, once you see it, I'm sure you will agree it's very "barbaric" (suggested debuffs include sealing mana for a bit or making someone lose a spell prep, for example).

>>I do though feel that its appropriate in the tactics system that Barb's get some great combat design in the tactics system based on their SOI. I guess the reason I am saying that its a perk at this point is that you will have expanded usage on it before others because your new guild-only skill is being developed and tied into it and its been said that this is happening based on their new guild-only skill. Ill stop and hold out for more info on the expansion for other guilds at this point.

Again, expertise is not tactics. You say you realize that, but then the substance of your argument is predicated on seeing expertise as only an expansion of the tactics system.

Barbarians should be capable of combat maneuvers which are not possible by other guild, in the same way Thieves are capable of unique stealth maneuvers. The tactics system seems a logical basis for this to me, mostly because I can't think of anything beyond tying whirlwind or warstomp into it, which doesn't seem good enough for an entire skill IMO.

>Again, expertise is not tactics. You say you realize that, but then the substance of your argument is predicated on seeing expertise as only an expansion of the tactics system.

>Barbarians should be capable of combat maneuvers which are not possible by other guild, in the same way Thieves are capable of unique stealth maneuvers. The tactics system seems a logical basis for this to me, mostly because I >can't think of anything beyond tying whirlwind or warstomp into it, which doesn't seem good enough for an entire skill IMO.

I was trying to get across that you're getting an expansion of the tactics system because its being tied to your guild-only skill. Which would be an expansion of both the tactics system as well as the Barbarian guild. I have no idea if the explanation of Expertise has changed but its supposed to fuel other guild-specific abilities. I have no idea what this means but I would assume that Whirlwind would be usable outside the tactics system.

What this reads to me is that Barbarians and Paladins are getting an expansion on the tactics skill separate from their guild-only skill.

Your guild-only skill - Returning you to equality.

Additional tactics expansion - Additional things other guilds should receive as well.

You're getting a tie-in to the tactics system on top of your specific guild-only skill.

You will have additional play into the system on top of your guild-only skill. This is what I am getting at. Im sorry it took this long to get there. I also have finally read through some other things and realized that other guilds will eventually get their tie-in as well(Assumption but based on what I read it seems so). That was my argument and all I can hope for is that the boss systems don't get introduced before the guilds I play get their tie-in so that I can actually handle (Or help handle) these critters when they come about.

>>You're getting a tie-in to the tactics system on top of your specific guild-only skill.

Saying it again, with emphasis: the tie-in to tactics is the guild-specific skill. I don't see why you're counting them separately, and that's the entire basis of your argument. That's like saying Moon mages get astrology and then predictions, when the whole point of Astrology is predictions (or Teleo sorcery).

>>This gives it the idea of both. Awesome maneuvers doesn't necessarily mean that its directly tied into Tactics.

This is pretty standard. Scouting has tie-ins to hunt, as well as Ranger trails, as well as a couple Ranger spells. Astrology is both predictions and spell tie-ins. Maybe expertise will be tied into whirlwind and warstomp? No clue, but it's main function is the tactics hook.

>>So again. Tie-in is additional based on what has been expressed.

At the present time the tactics hooks are the only tangible benefits that have been discussed, past all the brainstorming posts you mentioned. If the expertise skill ever reaches a stage of development where it does so much that the tactical maneuvers are only an after-thought, then sure, let's revisit the idea that everyone should get some. But right now it's not even released yet, so it seems quite silly to me to argue about how much value this entirely hypothetical skill entails, and whether it means other guilds "deserve" stuff too.

<<<Since my concerns are more for a specific guild I will refrain from posting about this any longer. I hope you get what is needed for your guild.>>>

Well that was all very odd.


- Buuwl

>>As per another folder, he was worried about Empaths being able to use these new combos without accruing shock. That's a perfectly valid concern and combos that feature only non-damaging tactical maneuvers would be a nice option for them. A bit strange to rant about expertise and endurance instead of simply voicing that concern though, I agree.<<

We know. We read the thread. Why must you respond to every post made?

Your body tightens as you draw your arms together in a sinuous, flowing motion, mimicking the form you were trained to adopt for this roar of warning.
Kodius fled to the west in terror!
Roundtime: 2 sec.

>>Kodius, I like the tweak to tactics and the analyze verb. I thought about trying to script it.. I started to put a table together.. then I moved to excel and started to put a match table together.. then I said to hell with that. I don't know if a match table that big would work. But I digress, nice stuff and it trains ALOT faster than bob and weave. I still don't care much for being forced to train it.<<

You have to put two extra commands into a script or hell if you just use attack it'll actually throw bobs, weaves, and circles in.

>>Additionally I can't say I care too much for having to train a handful of other skills (ie, Mastery, IF, Augmentation/Debilitation/Warding) with this rewrite, the only thing that contains my discontent is that they practically train themselves which leave me asking "why?"<<

The masteries train just by training normally. You're whining about training a skill that's essentially free? These skills require no actual effort to train. Hell you can learn IF, Augmentation and Warding by using two abilities. Debilitation will soon be trainable with using a specific berserk.

This is why we can't have nice things. We have people whining and complaining when we do.

Your body tightens as you draw your arms together in a sinuous, flowing motion, mimicking the form you were trained to adopt for this roar of warning.
Kodius fled to the west in terror!
Roundtime: 2 sec.

Because they are in the scope of the guild, and in the case of the supernatural skills required to use our abilities.

Your body tightens as you draw your arms together in a sinuous, flowing motion, mimicking the form you were trained to adopt for this roar of warning.
Kodius fled to the west in terror!
Roundtime: 2 sec.

>>Again I ask, why not what.<<

Why what? I answered your question. The skills are required to use our abilities and therefore are required to circle. If you can't grasp that, I don't know what to tell you.

Your body tightens as you draw your arms together in a sinuous, flowing motion, mimicking the form you were trained to adopt for this roar of warning.
Kodius fled to the west in terror!
Roundtime: 2 sec.

If it hadn't been for Expertise and Endurance needing an underlying system, I may never have developed combos in the first place and would have relied on Siege warfare to comprise the bulk of tactics' abilities (whenever I get around to writing them). To throw everyone a bone I decided to steal from those Guild-only skills and give to everyone a system they could make immediate use of, at the expense of 2 weeks of development time.

Expertise will focus on SELF COMBOS. Ways for Barbarians to improve their own abilities. They'll tie in heavily with IF and add new combat messaging and RP fluff. My goal is to make them more than just combo+UBERSMITE... which is what I suspect everyone would like to have. Unfortunately its a good 200 hour project, so we'll just have to see where I can squeeze it in.

If I get my way, all Guilds will have one unique potential Tactical combo effect. Lore guilds may get additional perks, but we've not hashed those out yet.

---

"I have no data yet. It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories instead of theories to suit facts."
- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, Sherlock Holmes