SHIFT3
Feedback on trader spells
01/03/2018 08:47 AM CST
The Good.
- ARS. I was pleasantly surprised to see decent offensive options for traders. I'm not a fan of the starlight cost, but I'm sure traders wouldn't have the option without it.
- Avtalia Array. Completely unique, very useful, and passive. One of my favorite abilities.
- Elision. TBD, but I suspect that I'll love it when I can cast it.
- Finesse. I'm calling this one a win, mainly because of the trader bonus up 100% of the time now, as opposed to an infrequent 5-10 minute downtime with speculate. Low-level traders won't see a problem, and my complaints with the spell can be eventually trained away. This all just barely puts it into the good category.
- Fluoresce. It's in the good solely because it's AOE. That was a great touch, and it makes it justify the starlight cost.
- Mask of the Moons. See elision.
- Membrach's Greed. Simple buff. Always good.
- Platinum Hands of Kertigen. Lots of good crafting buffs. I'd have preferred this to be a single spell with meta-spells, but traders aren't really slot locked at the moment. This will likely be the premier scroll spell everyone wants from the trader books.
- Resumption. I get the theme. I love it for traders, but I'm surprised this wasn't a paladin spell. Lucky us, poor paladins. (heh, as someone as a trader, it is nice to be able to say poor <guild> rather than poor <traders>)
- Turmar Illumination. See Membrach's greed. No frills, no penalty skill buff. Always a fan.
- Starcrash. See ARS.
The neutral.
- CRD. The recent change makes this okay'ish, but the starlight aura cost makes it hard to train with this spell.
- Blur. Speculate defense was better, but tactics is nice, I guess. The fluff messaging is a nice touch.
- Last Gift of Vithwok IV. See blur, but this one is better because of the spellbook.
- Nonchalance. I personally don't see myself using this one. I don't PvP. Others who do will find value here, so I'm putting it as neutral. YMMV.
- Trabe Chalice. Maybe useful in PvP, but I just end up using MAF for PVE. The ablative physical defense doesn't really work for fast attacking creatures unless I don't really need it. If I was in high-level PvE with my trader then I would likely have a different opinion. I seem to recall this having a starlight cost too, which just compounds the penalties (shatter on Puncture, starlight aura, full prep only, can't replace easily..why?)
The bad.
- Regalia and Bespoke Regalia. With the abundance of high-quality armor, and the ease at which we can repair our own armor, I don't see myself using this one. This needs a little something special to make it worthwhile, especially considering all of the penalties (reduced protection and absorbtion for more hindrance and [at low levels] weight, and you won't have any armor if you need to recast it without enough starlight.) attached to its use.
- Noumena. I'm putting this one here because it feels like the CARE equivalent for traders. It's a spell that only exists to get around arbitrary penalties with the system. Unlike CARE, it costs a slot. If compared to PG then PG at least has a mediocre side-effect to kind of justify the slot cost.
- Avren Aevareae. I love the theme, but the moon penalty is kind of a deal-breaker on this. I'm unlikely to ever use it because I'm casting on specific moons for a specific effect that aren't always up when I need it. Instead, I'll likely just get a shadows scroll or train sorcery for misdirection if I need the debuff too.
- Stellar Collector. TBD. I can't cast this spell yet. I may actually like it, but on paper it feels like Noumena with extra steps.
General
- We need some better training spells that don't require moons or starlight.
- - An advanced utility spell in the neomatic book. Maybe esoteric too if starlight collector has a problem with recasting.
- - TRC can be worked around using AP spells, so that's fineish, but I wouldn't say not to a better option. Maybe re-structuring the spell could not use starlight, and let us cast it when it's not at full prep?
- - Same with TM options. CRD needs to just remove the starlight entirely so you don't have to spam it to train TM vs just casting it when it makes the most sense since you want some creatures to keep training defenses and passive weapons.
- - Another esoteric warding would be nice if MOM isn't suitable for training (I think it'll be fine though. I just don't know yet.)
- - I like the capstones for each book. They feel special (array more than collector), and I think that would be a good thing to do to other guilds.
DR-GREJUVA
Re: Feedback on trader spells
01/03/2018 09:43 AM CST
>full prep only, can't replace easily..why?
Trabe Chalice is incredibly efficient at what it does. Unlike most damage reducers, it can fully absorb damage (no cap per hit) until its very large pool of hitpoints are depleted. That's not something likely to become easily refreshable. Now, it's possible that impact damage makes up too much of what creatures deal. There are a few things I can tweak in the spell, but for now I'd like to see feedback about its performance against different creatures and with stronger casts.
>>I like the capstones for each book. They feel special (array more than collector)
Fabrication's capstone isn't here yet.
GM Grejuva
Trabe Chalice is incredibly efficient at what it does. Unlike most damage reducers, it can fully absorb damage (no cap per hit) until its very large pool of hitpoints are depleted. That's not something likely to become easily refreshable. Now, it's possible that impact damage makes up too much of what creatures deal. There are a few things I can tweak in the spell, but for now I'd like to see feedback about its performance against different creatures and with stronger casts.
>>I like the capstones for each book. They feel special (array more than collector)
Fabrication's capstone isn't here yet.
GM Grejuva
DR-ARMIFER
Re: Feedback on trader spells
01/03/2018 10:10 AM CST
>>- Regalia
Regalia starts in a somewhat bad place because it benefits in multiple, noticeable ways from pumping more mana into it. I may end up looking at easing the low end performance, but for now I want to see what opinions are as Traders get more magic and are able to cast it with more competency.
>>- Avren Aevareae
Unlike what I previously said, AVE does have a starlight aura option. Not terribly much help if you want the +stealth option, admittedly.
>>- Noumena.
>>- Stellar Collector
If you want to define the environmental restrictions as arbitrary and needless, then your assessment is pretty much spot on. I define them as features which, like WMs, Empaths, MMs, Rangers, eventually Necros and eventually Paladins you gain the ability to "cheat" on over time.
It's certainly true that not every guild is built evenly, but we have built towards the idea that the confound is at least a little confounding over recent years.
>>- - Same with TM options. CRD needs to just remove the starlight entirely so you don't have to spam it to train TM vs just casting it when it makes the most sense since you want some creatures to keep training defenses and passive weapons.
I am unwilling to remove CRD's adverse conditions penalty entirely, but I have an idea to loosen it a bit further that I might run with. You may see this today, or never.
-Armifer
"Perinthia's astronomers are faced with a difficult choice. Either they must admit that all their calculations were wrong ... or else they must reveal that the order of the gods is reflected exactly in the city of monsters." - Italo Calvino
Regalia starts in a somewhat bad place because it benefits in multiple, noticeable ways from pumping more mana into it. I may end up looking at easing the low end performance, but for now I want to see what opinions are as Traders get more magic and are able to cast it with more competency.
>>- Avren Aevareae
Unlike what I previously said, AVE does have a starlight aura option. Not terribly much help if you want the +stealth option, admittedly.
>>- Noumena.
>>- Stellar Collector
If you want to define the environmental restrictions as arbitrary and needless, then your assessment is pretty much spot on. I define them as features which, like WMs, Empaths, MMs, Rangers, eventually Necros and eventually Paladins you gain the ability to "cheat" on over time.
It's certainly true that not every guild is built evenly, but we have built towards the idea that the confound is at least a little confounding over recent years.
>>- - Same with TM options. CRD needs to just remove the starlight entirely so you don't have to spam it to train TM vs just casting it when it makes the most sense since you want some creatures to keep training defenses and passive weapons.
I am unwilling to remove CRD's adverse conditions penalty entirely, but I have an idea to loosen it a bit further that I might run with. You may see this today, or never.
-Armifer
"Perinthia's astronomers are faced with a difficult choice. Either they must admit that all their calculations were wrong ... or else they must reveal that the order of the gods is reflected exactly in the city of monsters." - Italo Calvino
TEVESHSZAT
Re: Feedback on trader spells
01/03/2018 11:22 AM CST
>>If you want to define the environmental restrictions as arbitrary and needless, then your assessment is pretty much spot on. I define them as features which, like WMs, Empaths, MMs, Rangers, eventually Necros and eventually Paladins you gain the ability to "cheat" on over time.
I do wonder how much the starlight thing remains a hindrance once Traders really know what they're doing WRT magic. Like will it be similar to how magic users stop paying attention to concentration once their stats get high enough, or how mana/attunement isn't stop reallys being an issue once your power perception hits a certain point and you have the skill/knowledge that lets you better manage mana usage.
From a third person perspective, it's really interesting to see all this playing out. I do wonder if a high magic Traders are going to really start embracing T5 (maybe T6? I don't think moonblades can hit T6 unlike WM summonables, but I could be wrong) in time.
Uzmam! The Chairman will NOT be pleased to know you're trying to build outside of approved zones. I'd hate for you to be charged the taxes needed to have this place re-zoned. Head for the manor if you're feeling creative.
I do wonder how much the starlight thing remains a hindrance once Traders really know what they're doing WRT magic. Like will it be similar to how magic users stop paying attention to concentration once their stats get high enough, or how mana/attunement isn't stop reallys being an issue once your power perception hits a certain point and you have the skill/knowledge that lets you better manage mana usage.
From a third person perspective, it's really interesting to see all this playing out. I do wonder if a high magic Traders are going to really start embracing T5 (maybe T6? I don't think moonblades can hit T6 unlike WM summonables, but I could be wrong) in time.
Uzmam! The Chairman will NOT be pleased to know you're trying to build outside of approved zones. I'd hate for you to be charged the taxes needed to have this place re-zoned. Head for the manor if you're feeling creative.
SHIFT3
Re: Feedback on trader spells
01/03/2018 11:54 AM CST
To preface this to say that unlike my other posts, I'm not actually advocating for a change here (excepting CRD and still pushing for regalia). I think there is far more good in the trader spell-book than bad, but I did want to give my feedback on why some spells aren't of use to me right now. Someone may like them, and that's fine. I think there is room for improvement as well, but I like the list as is.
> There are a few things I can tweak in the spell, but for now I'd like to see feedback about its performance against different creatures and with stronger casts.
I admit this may also be a problem with the level I can cast it at right now. I'm not capping the spell, nor do I have a great aura pool. I'll keep playing with it and see if I can get you some numbers. Can I see them in test or do I need to just average multiple hits?
> Fabrication's capstone isn't here yet.
Interesting. I'm looking forward to it!
> If you want to define the environmental restrictions as arbitrary and needless, then your assessment is pretty much spot on. I define them as features which, like WMs, Empaths, MMs, Rangers, eventually Necros and eventually Paladins you gain the ability to "cheat" on over time.
I get it. Lunar magic is based off the moons, and that's not going away. I think it's counter-productive to how the game is played, but that's neither here nor there. The main issue is the sheer number of spells which require moons, and some otherwise useful spells
> WMs, Empaths, MMs, Rangers, eventually Necros
Necros are "hard mode" and intentionally punitive.
Elemental/Life are generally terrain/creature limited, and warrior mages have a way to sway that in their favor. Empaths also have a way to negate the shock penalty with undead. That's the way it should be done in my opinion.
The difference between lunar magic and life/elemental is that you don't have access to your full spellbook all the time. Moon mages have it bad. I should not be surprised by this. I thought traders would be less moon dependent (and they really are), but I didn't realize that this wouldn't be moon independent. That's on me.
My main problem is that I see secondary resources as a bonus. I see them as providing access to abilities (spells without slot costs) and training guild skill. Astrology, Summoning, Devotion, etc...
> and eventually Paladins
I sincerely request that paladins follow a model more suited to holy mana. Only require a certain level of devotion or soul for some abilities, and don't drain them when you use those abilities. I'd rather it be like summoning. You can build it up then spend it rather than being like lunar mana (binary access during certain times of the day).
> It's certainly true that not every guild is built evenly, but we have built towards the idea that the confound is at least a little confounding over recent years.
That's not a bad thing. This goes to personal preference, and not every spell or ability will appeal to everyone. I'd rather think two spells are maintenance-y than see a further push to homogenization. I strongly believe that you should want to play different guilds for a different kind of feel, but on the flip side, that means some will be easier or harder to work with.
> I am unwilling to remove CRD's adverse conditions penalty entirely, but I have an idea to loosen it a bit further that I might run with. You may see this today, or never.
Would you consider a different spell entirely then for training purposes? Maybe something akin to paralysis? Make it a Noematics spell where you try to send a psychic bolt to shut down the target's mind (immobilize them).
> I do wonder how much the starlight thing remains a hindrance once Traders really know what they're doing WRT magic.
I wonder the same. This is my perception now. I may have a completely different opinion when I reach 500 PM and a larger aura pool and access to collector.
> There are a few things I can tweak in the spell, but for now I'd like to see feedback about its performance against different creatures and with stronger casts.
I admit this may also be a problem with the level I can cast it at right now. I'm not capping the spell, nor do I have a great aura pool. I'll keep playing with it and see if I can get you some numbers. Can I see them in test or do I need to just average multiple hits?
> Fabrication's capstone isn't here yet.
Interesting. I'm looking forward to it!
> If you want to define the environmental restrictions as arbitrary and needless, then your assessment is pretty much spot on. I define them as features which, like WMs, Empaths, MMs, Rangers, eventually Necros and eventually Paladins you gain the ability to "cheat" on over time.
I get it. Lunar magic is based off the moons, and that's not going away. I think it's counter-productive to how the game is played, but that's neither here nor there. The main issue is the sheer number of spells which require moons, and some otherwise useful spells
> WMs, Empaths, MMs, Rangers, eventually Necros
Necros are "hard mode" and intentionally punitive.
Elemental/Life are generally terrain/creature limited, and warrior mages have a way to sway that in their favor. Empaths also have a way to negate the shock penalty with undead. That's the way it should be done in my opinion.
The difference between lunar magic and life/elemental is that you don't have access to your full spellbook all the time. Moon mages have it bad. I should not be surprised by this. I thought traders would be less moon dependent (and they really are), but I didn't realize that this wouldn't be moon independent. That's on me.
My main problem is that I see secondary resources as a bonus. I see them as providing access to abilities (spells without slot costs) and training guild skill. Astrology, Summoning, Devotion, etc...
> and eventually Paladins
I sincerely request that paladins follow a model more suited to holy mana. Only require a certain level of devotion or soul for some abilities, and don't drain them when you use those abilities. I'd rather it be like summoning. You can build it up then spend it rather than being like lunar mana (binary access during certain times of the day).
> It's certainly true that not every guild is built evenly, but we have built towards the idea that the confound is at least a little confounding over recent years.
That's not a bad thing. This goes to personal preference, and not every spell or ability will appeal to everyone. I'd rather think two spells are maintenance-y than see a further push to homogenization. I strongly believe that you should want to play different guilds for a different kind of feel, but on the flip side, that means some will be easier or harder to work with.
> I am unwilling to remove CRD's adverse conditions penalty entirely, but I have an idea to loosen it a bit further that I might run with. You may see this today, or never.
Would you consider a different spell entirely then for training purposes? Maybe something akin to paralysis? Make it a Noematics spell where you try to send a psychic bolt to shut down the target's mind (immobilize them).
> I do wonder how much the starlight thing remains a hindrance once Traders really know what they're doing WRT magic.
I wonder the same. This is my perception now. I may have a completely different opinion when I reach 500 PM and a larger aura pool and access to collector.
TEVESHSZAT
Re: Feedback on trader spells
01/03/2018 12:25 PM CST
>>Necros are "hard mode" and intentionally punitive.
IMO, the "hard mode" aspect doesn't really apply to the Divine Outrage part of their magic, which can be worked around in time.
>>warrior mages have a way to sway that in their favor
Yes, with enough skill. I think what Armifer is stressing is that, with enough time/skill, the starlight requirement won't be as big of a deal as it currently it is for many Traders. A similar comparison is how newbie Moon Mages have the worst energy levels compared to every other magic type because of how Lunar power levels work, but in the long haul they're generally better off than everyone else, because of how Lunar power levels work.
If starlight currently feels too difficult to use, it very well might change once Traders get more into the swing of using their powers.
Uzmam! The Chairman will NOT be pleased to know you're trying to build outside of approved zones. I'd hate for you to be charged the taxes needed to have this place re-zoned. Head for the manor if you're feeling creative.
IMO, the "hard mode" aspect doesn't really apply to the Divine Outrage part of their magic, which can be worked around in time.
>>warrior mages have a way to sway that in their favor
Yes, with enough skill. I think what Armifer is stressing is that, with enough time/skill, the starlight requirement won't be as big of a deal as it currently it is for many Traders. A similar comparison is how newbie Moon Mages have the worst energy levels compared to every other magic type because of how Lunar power levels work, but in the long haul they're generally better off than everyone else, because of how Lunar power levels work.
If starlight currently feels too difficult to use, it very well might change once Traders get more into the swing of using their powers.
Uzmam! The Chairman will NOT be pleased to know you're trying to build outside of approved zones. I'd hate for you to be charged the taxes needed to have this place re-zoned. Head for the manor if you're feeling creative.
SHIFT3
Re: Feedback on trader spells
01/03/2018 02:02 PM CST
> Yes, with enough skill. I think what Armifer is stressing is that, with enough time/skill, the starlight requirement won't be as big of a deal as it currently it is for many Traders.
I mean, that's fair. We're still very early in all of this.
> A similar comparison is how newbie Moon Mages have the worst energy levels compared to every other magic type because of how Lunar power levels work,
That's not thought. There's a difference in reduced energy levels and no energy at all.
> If starlight currently feels too difficult to use, it very well might change once Traders get more into the swing of using their powers.
Maybe. I hope so. I really hope paladin magic doesn't suffer the same constraints. I'm not asking for this, but I think it would be a different situation if casting with no starlight or the wrong moons resulted in a weakened spell rather than no spell at all.
TEVESHSZAT
Re: Feedback on trader spells
01/03/2018 02:14 PM CST
>>That's not thought. There's a difference in reduced energy levels and no energy at all.
Maybe we had different experiences playing baby Moon Mages, and maybe things changed post-3.0, but no moons up as a baby Moon Mage wasn't exactly the best time to train magic.
Uzmam! The Chairman will NOT be pleased to know you're trying to build outside of approved zones. I'd hate for you to be charged the taxes needed to have this place re-zoned. Head for the manor if you're feeling creative.
Maybe we had different experiences playing baby Moon Mages, and maybe things changed post-3.0, but no moons up as a baby Moon Mage wasn't exactly the best time to train magic.
Uzmam! The Chairman will NOT be pleased to know you're trying to build outside of approved zones. I'd hate for you to be charged the taxes needed to have this place re-zoned. Head for the manor if you're feeling creative.
LAUGHINGGOD
Re: Feedback on trader spells
01/03/2018 02:33 PM CST
>Maybe we had different experiences playing baby Moon Mages, and maybe things changed post-3.0, but no moons up as a baby Moon Mage wasn't exactly the best time to train magic.
Yep. Now I'm not good at playing MUs in general (doesn't matter what game) but mine would hunt easy critters with no moons or just loop a script and observe the heavens or weather. Got tired of it an decided to run a Trader (go figure).
Balkinar (and pals)
Yep. Now I'm not good at playing MUs in general (doesn't matter what game) but mine would hunt easy critters with no moons or just loop a script and observe the heavens or weather. Got tired of it an decided to run a Trader (go figure).
Balkinar (and pals)
SHIFT3
Re: Feedback on trader spells
01/03/2018 03:18 PM CST
> Maybe we had different experiences playing baby Moon Mages, and maybe things changed post-3.0, but no moons up as a baby Moon Mage wasn't exactly the best time to train magic.
We're tangenting, but it's very different now.
Augmentation: 8/10 can be cast without moons, sky, or night-time. This will take you from 0-cap.
Debilitation: 8/9 can be cast without moons, sky, or night-time. This will take you from 0-cap, even excluding heavy-TM mind shout and sorcery.
Targeted: 3/5 can be cast without moons, sky, or night-time. This will take you from 0-cap.
Utility: 10/20 can be cast without moons, sky, or night-time (excluding the spells that teach multiple skillsets). This will take you from 0-cap.
Warding: 2/4 can be cast without mana, moons, sky, or night-time. This will take you from 0-cap.
Moon mages can completely ignore the moons if they wanted to, except when they were actively doing something that required them. This lets them train as every other guild trains. So moon mages are in a better position, as one would honestly expect from a magic prime.
I'm not suggesting traders are without options. I plan on picking up DO or STRA or TKS for TM, and permanently learn MAF for warding. It's not terrible that choices have to be made. My personal opinion (take that for what it's worth) is that a penalty that's expected to be reduced or negated 100% of time should just be reduced by default. Let the maintenance buffs also be interesting choices.
If I were to make a change (which I'm not suggesting!) then I'd make...
- Traders of 10th (?) circle should get the daytime/cloud-cover effect as a passive ability. Give a little speech about how you've been touched by starlight, and it permeates your entire being. It's supernaturally attracted to them. Maybe add surgical implantation of crystals similar to the array spell.
- Starlight isn't required for any spell, but having access to moonlight would cause them to be empowered (secondary effects, or stronger in general). No access causes them to be weakened (primary effect only, % potency and duration reduction).
- Noumena would be a way to tap into your own natural starlight when none is available, similar to today, but it's a choice. You cast the buff, and spells would be empowered similar to WILL for bards or HYH for clerics. If you run out of starlight, the buff fades.
- Stellar collector would be a braun's conjecture type ritual. It turns your collection ability up to 11 and increases your pool size and decreases costs. It would be something you're intended to outgrow. The optional spell would be a trade-off for those who wanted power earlier at the cost of fewer slots to spend on other interesting things.
- I'd add a buff for "lingering starlight." It's the RTR equivalent. Ritual spell to let you charge up your pools when they're low. Requires only the sky.
- I'd also add a new spell. Maybe sorcery. It would let you fuel your starlight spells with spirit rather than starlight aura. It's basically a vigil on your starlight pool. Spirit drains, pool goes up. This gives traders a second benefit of letting their pool size be based off charisma rather than wisdom. This would also create a "rift" between you and starlight (maybe not a breach of contract, but definitely close to it) that would cause you to suffer reduced starlight regeneration when out in the wild. Frankly, there's a whole suite of spells you could build off this.
- Avren Aevareae isn't cast on moons. By default, it drains starlight (gives it to you) from the area to increase stealth/thieving. with Noumena up it would instead drain it from you to give to the area to have the opposite effect).
In other words, starlight isn't a binary on/off kind of thing. It's more waning/waxing of the moons rather than the moon mage's "is it there so I can drop a beam" type of situation.
That said. I'm NOT requesting this. I'm only explaining my personal opinions. I'm not even strongly (or mildly, really) opposed to the current direction. It's not what I thought was happening. It's not as appealing to me as a no starlight-required option, but I can live with that. I assume the GMs can too.
TEVESHSZAT
Re: Feedback on trader spells
01/03/2018 03:28 PM CST
>>Moon mages can completely ignore the moons if they wanted to, except when they were actively doing something that required them. This lets them train as every other guild trains. So moon mages are in a better position, as one would honestly expect from a magic prime.
I'm not talking about a moon requirement for spells, I'm talking about the fact that, with the moons down, a baby moon mage literally had next-to-no mana in the room to cast spells effectively. IMO, and for all intents and purposes, "starlight" is very similar to "mana," especially in the context that higher stats/skills = more access to starlight.
Uzmam! The Chairman will NOT be pleased to know you're trying to build outside of approved zones. I'd hate for you to be charged the taxes needed to have this place re-zoned. Head for the manor if you're feeling creative.
I'm not talking about a moon requirement for spells, I'm talking about the fact that, with the moons down, a baby moon mage literally had next-to-no mana in the room to cast spells effectively. IMO, and for all intents and purposes, "starlight" is very similar to "mana," especially in the context that higher stats/skills = more access to starlight.
Uzmam! The Chairman will NOT be pleased to know you're trying to build outside of approved zones. I'd hate for you to be charged the taxes needed to have this place re-zoned. Head for the manor if you're feeling creative.
SHIFT3
Re: Feedback on trader spells
01/03/2018 04:06 PM CST
> I'm not talking about a moon requirement for spells, I'm talking about the fact that, with the moons down, a baby moon mage literally had next-to-no mana in the room to cast spells effectively.
Mana is not a problem. It hasn't been for a very long time at those levels. Even if it was, this would affect traders too with or without starlight aura.
> IMO, and for all intents and purposes, "starlight" is very similar to "mana,"
I wholeheartedly disagree.
Mana is mana. Starlight is a secondary resource. It's like a back-up moon that runs out of power. When the moons aren't available (for various reasons) you draw on your special internal moon. If you wanted to stretch it then maybe it would be similar to elemental charge, mojo, devotion, paladin pools, or observation pools. Frankly, it's something moon mages have wanted for a very long time, and I don't have a problem with the starlight itself. I hope I made that clear in my other post.
> especially in the context that higher stats/skills = more access to starlight.
You just described every secondary pool in the game, right? Except maybe the confidence systems.
TEVESHSZAT
Re: Feedback on trader spells
01/03/2018 04:32 PM CST
>>You just described every secondary pool in the game, right?
I was attempting to reinforce Armifer's point, so yes, I'm glad I properly described every secondary pool in the game.
Uzmam! The Chairman will NOT be pleased to know you're trying to build outside of approved zones. I'd hate for you to be charged the taxes needed to have this place re-zoned. Head for the manor if you're feeling creative.
I was attempting to reinforce Armifer's point, so yes, I'm glad I properly described every secondary pool in the game.
Uzmam! The Chairman will NOT be pleased to know you're trying to build outside of approved zones. I'd hate for you to be charged the taxes needed to have this place re-zoned. Head for the manor if you're feeling creative.
SCHULTZS3
Re: Feedback on trader spells
01/04/2018 01:19 AM CST
Personally, I am very satisfied overall.
My local internet was down for about 9 hours, essentially all day.
During that time I decided to crunch the scratch spreadsheet of Trader spell data I made into my general DR spreadsheet, starting with a comparison of what the "planned" Trader spellbooks were. Basically, I came up with the following.
What we didn't get:
Explosive Dart (I suggest this as a Heavy TM spell)
Immobilize Debil (Illusion of Grandeur)
Trip Debil (Caltrops)
+Warding, +Enchantment (Integrity)
+worn Armor skills (Confidence of Arms)
Tool/weapon/armor durability buffers (Fortify)
Tool quality buffer (Ancestral Arts)
Fire/Elect barrier (Conductive Spires)
+Locks, +Thievery (Back Alley Tricks)
Harmless (Basically Empath Innocence)
Whatever Mirror Image, Programmed Illusion, Astral Projection do that Elision doesn't
What we got that wasn't planned:
Summoned armor as Regalia/BSPK
+Tactics in Blur
+Agi in Finesse
+Outdoorsmanship, +Skinning as MEG
+Engineering in PHK
Ignore exp loss with Resumption
+Int on TURI
Honestly I don't feel we NEED anything more except possibly another debil to stun/immobilize/prone, but I suppose we have Spec Coin for that. Plus there's obviously more to come that didn't make initial release.
Back on topic, unlike original OP, I LOVE Fluoresce, regardless if it's AOE. I love watching my weapons absolutely maul critters I'm really underlevel with, that I used to just scuff to death when backtraining at the same ranks. I didn't train more AGI, I didn't get more ranks, I just keep Fluoresce up.
I feel Noumena will be what greatly helps Traders bypass most of the limitations of the aura.
What I DON'T like about the system isn't the spells, but part of the system. There's too much time spent indoors in craft halls or Trader shops, or possibly hunting in caves (fortunately I just got out of some caves and am back in the open stepping greatly up the ladder). I don't know what to do about this, since it's obviously just part of the system.
Naniaki Felyran
"I have faith in the current crop of GMs to not screw people over"
>>Actually an opinion cannot be changed or corrected. Nice try back of line.-VERATHOR
>>But it can be wrong.-Starlear
My local internet was down for about 9 hours, essentially all day.
During that time I decided to crunch the scratch spreadsheet of Trader spell data I made into my general DR spreadsheet, starting with a comparison of what the "planned" Trader spellbooks were. Basically, I came up with the following.
What we didn't get:
Explosive Dart (I suggest this as a Heavy TM spell)
Immobilize Debil (Illusion of Grandeur)
Trip Debil (Caltrops)
+Warding, +Enchantment (Integrity)
+worn Armor skills (Confidence of Arms)
Tool/weapon/armor durability buffers (Fortify)
Tool quality buffer (Ancestral Arts)
Fire/Elect barrier (Conductive Spires)
+Locks, +Thievery (Back Alley Tricks)
Harmless (Basically Empath Innocence)
Whatever Mirror Image, Programmed Illusion, Astral Projection do that Elision doesn't
What we got that wasn't planned:
Summoned armor as Regalia/BSPK
+Tactics in Blur
+Agi in Finesse
+Outdoorsmanship, +Skinning as MEG
+Engineering in PHK
Ignore exp loss with Resumption
+Int on TURI
Honestly I don't feel we NEED anything more except possibly another debil to stun/immobilize/prone, but I suppose we have Spec Coin for that. Plus there's obviously more to come that didn't make initial release.
Back on topic, unlike original OP, I LOVE Fluoresce, regardless if it's AOE. I love watching my weapons absolutely maul critters I'm really underlevel with, that I used to just scuff to death when backtraining at the same ranks. I didn't train more AGI, I didn't get more ranks, I just keep Fluoresce up.
I feel Noumena will be what greatly helps Traders bypass most of the limitations of the aura.
What I DON'T like about the system isn't the spells, but part of the system. There's too much time spent indoors in craft halls or Trader shops, or possibly hunting in caves (fortunately I just got out of some caves and am back in the open stepping greatly up the ladder). I don't know what to do about this, since it's obviously just part of the system.
Naniaki Felyran
"I have faith in the current crop of GMs to not screw people over"
>>Actually an opinion cannot be changed or corrected. Nice try back of line.-VERATHOR
>>But it can be wrong.-Starlear
KAIMI
TC Spell Prep Merchant fixed
01/06/2018 12:15 PM CST
You produce an illusory coin and begin rolling it across your knuckles, focusing on the pattern for the Arbiter's Stylus spell.
Thanks ARMIFER!
