I love the overall shuffle, it eliminated some redundancy (two stun spells, two knockdowns) in Warrior mage spells, for which I thank you. Individual thoughts:
* I never used Anther's Call much either way so this seems like a side-grade. Khri Guile is only one slot but Thieves have their own weird spellslot thing going on with less total spell slots. Everild's rage is two slots and AOE but they need a separate mastery to enable AOE roars. Two slots isn't unreasonable given the landscape but I worry it won't see much use.
* I love the Ice Patch change since the knockdown was kept. I guess I can just use Arc Light if I need a simple stun for some reason.
* Hard to get excited about a simple slot increase for SUF, but it's been mentioned before in the past. Grumpy but I get it, I could even have seen 3 slots.
* I like the removal of sitting/kneeling immunity but I'm not sure about Tremor's loss of single-target. I assume it's just to make it distinct from Ice Patch?
TEQUILASUNRISE
NASTY8
Re: Spell Changes
02/09/2018 06:07 AM CST
What's the reason for the IP change? Ice Patch would put you prone and stunned which could make you forget the spell you're prepping. I think losing the stun screws us pretty hard in pvp.
-Nate
-Nate
HASTALUEGO
Re: Spell Changes
02/09/2018 06:39 AM CST
On Anther's, it is a weird spell because of how it functions (Won't work indoors or anywhere where the ground isn't considered "natural" which is a lot more places than you'd think.) but since it immobilized, there are times when it when using it might be called for. I'm not sure how much I'll make the attempt to try it for -Evasion. I guess we'll see.
On IP, its a definite nerf. I'm kind of wondering where the need for this came from.
I also weep for the loss of Single Target Tremor.
On IP, its a definite nerf. I'm kind of wondering where the need for this came from.
I also weep for the loss of Single Target Tremor.
JULIAN
Re: Spell Changes
02/09/2018 07:10 AM CST
IDK, IP is now good against things that are immune to stuns, like zombies. Also won't trigger Antistun or stun hiders, etc. I don't think it's a nerf.
Anthers can now stack a debuff on top of a stun, immobilization, or balance hit for more debuff potential than wms had before and without diminishing returns. It makes lightning bolt better. Not a nerf imo though yeah, not sure how much I will use it.
The changes do leave us without CC vs things that are immune to stuns and knockdowns but I'm having a hard time thinking of what those might be.
Overall I'm a fan.
Mazrian
Anthers can now stack a debuff on top of a stun, immobilization, or balance hit for more debuff potential than wms had before and without diminishing returns. It makes lightning bolt better. Not a nerf imo though yeah, not sure how much I will use it.
The changes do leave us without CC vs things that are immune to stuns and knockdowns but I'm having a hard time thinking of what those might be.
Overall I'm a fan.
Mazrian
SHIFT3
Re: Spell Changes
02/09/2018 07:53 AM CST
> I love the overall shuffle, it eliminated some redundancy (two stun spells, two knockdowns) in Warrior mage spells, for which I thank you.
Pretty much this. Warrior mage books have always been too redundant. A -evasion spell is right up their alley.
> Grumpy but I get it, I could even have seen 3 slots.
Hey now, don't give anyone any ideas :P
Request: Can you also look at which spells cause shock? Thunderclap, DMRS, and Frostbite comes to mind.
JULIAN
Re: Spell Changes
02/09/2018 08:05 AM CST
Sure Footing went from 3 to 2 iirc so not something to be grumpy about.
Mazrian
Mazrian
DR-JAVAC
Re: Spell Changes
02/09/2018 08:24 AM CST
>I'm kind of wondering where the need for this came from.
It was definitely about eliminating redundancy. Two single target stun spells makes one of them useless, except as a pre-req. In eliminating redundancy, you got something new in your debilitation suite. -Evasion is two slots, because +Evasion is two slots.
>I like the removal of sitting/kneeling immunity but I'm not sure about Tremor's loss of single-target. I assume it's just to make it distinct from Ice Patch?
The change to Tremor is two-fold. One is because single target knockdown is redundant with Ice Patch, but also the single target option was not accounted for in its slot cost.
>Hard to get excited about a simple slot increase for SUF, but it's been mentioned before in the past. Grumpy but I get it, I could even have seen 3 slots.
This was a decrease, as someone else mentioned. SuF used to be 3 slots, while other similar abilities are 2.
Javac
That one guy
If you have questions or comments in regard to this post please email me at DR-JAVAC@play.net.
It was definitely about eliminating redundancy. Two single target stun spells makes one of them useless, except as a pre-req. In eliminating redundancy, you got something new in your debilitation suite. -Evasion is two slots, because +Evasion is two slots.
>I like the removal of sitting/kneeling immunity but I'm not sure about Tremor's loss of single-target. I assume it's just to make it distinct from Ice Patch?
The change to Tremor is two-fold. One is because single target knockdown is redundant with Ice Patch, but also the single target option was not accounted for in its slot cost.
>Hard to get excited about a simple slot increase for SUF, but it's been mentioned before in the past. Grumpy but I get it, I could even have seen 3 slots.
This was a decrease, as someone else mentioned. SuF used to be 3 slots, while other similar abilities are 2.
Javac
That one guy
If you have questions or comments in regard to this post please email me at DR-JAVAC@play.net.
HASTALUEGO
Re: Spell Changes
02/09/2018 08:36 AM CST
>>It was definitely about eliminating redundancy. Two single target stun spells makes one of them useless, except as a pre-req. In eliminating redundancy, you got something new in your debilitation suite. -Evasion is two slots, because +Evasion is two slots.
Just a few comments.
1. I'm willing to wager that in the name of eliminating redundancy, people would have rather seen a change to Arc Light. Just guessing here.
2. As previously mentioned, Anther's environmental wonkiness could make the new addition a bench warmer.
3. There was some separation between Tremor and IP due to IP having a stun and Tremor being a spell with a duration. But, eh.
Just a few comments.
1. I'm willing to wager that in the name of eliminating redundancy, people would have rather seen a change to Arc Light. Just guessing here.
2. As previously mentioned, Anther's environmental wonkiness could make the new addition a bench warmer.
3. There was some separation between Tremor and IP due to IP having a stun and Tremor being a spell with a duration. But, eh.
NASTY8
Re: Spell Changes
02/09/2018 08:50 AM CST
>> 1. I'm willing to wager that in the name of eliminating redundancy, people would have rather seen a change to Arc Light. Just guessing here.
1000% agree. If we want to eliminate redundancy, lets change AL. Changing IP feels like a direct nerf to arguably our best pvp debilitator.
-Nate
1000% agree. If we want to eliminate redundancy, lets change AL. Changing IP feels like a direct nerf to arguably our best pvp debilitator.
-Nate
ELSBETH
Re: Spell Changes
02/09/2018 09:12 AM CST
Typical kneejerk rage reaction from people that haven't even tested it yet
IP change means that it doesn't trigger stun hiders any more. That's a good thing
Anc means you can tank someone's evasion and then lb them. That's a beast thing
How about you folks test it before raging out. Although I'd be willing to bet most of the people complaining don't even pvp.
IP change means that it doesn't trigger stun hiders any more. That's a good thing
Anc means you can tank someone's evasion and then lb them. That's a beast thing
How about you folks test it before raging out. Although I'd be willing to bet most of the people complaining don't even pvp.
JHALIASCLERIC
Re: Spell Changes
02/09/2018 09:27 AM CST
If there's a comprehensive look at spell balance, I hope they go much much further than reducing some of the redundency, giving a free spell slot, and giving an already super well situated guild an additional debuff.
JULIAN
DR-JAVAC
Re: Spell Changes
02/09/2018 09:33 AM CST
>lets change AL
Arc Light just changed. It does, from an IC perspective, the exact same thing as Dazzle. It stuns you with a flash of light. Justifying Arc Light doing something different than Dazzle, considering they produce the same IG effect, is unlikely considering how recently we changed Arc Light.
>Anther's environmental wonkiness could make the new addition a bench warmer
I didn’t change the environmental requirements of the spell. I use it on my PC while hunting to train Debil, and haven’t had issues. If you’re finding areas you don’t think it should be failing in, please BUG it, or let me know directly.
Javac
That one guy
If you have questions or comments in regard to this post please email me at DR-JAVAC@play.net.
Arc Light just changed. It does, from an IC perspective, the exact same thing as Dazzle. It stuns you with a flash of light. Justifying Arc Light doing something different than Dazzle, considering they produce the same IG effect, is unlikely considering how recently we changed Arc Light.
>Anther's environmental wonkiness could make the new addition a bench warmer
I didn’t change the environmental requirements of the spell. I use it on my PC while hunting to train Debil, and haven’t had issues. If you’re finding areas you don’t think it should be failing in, please BUG it, or let me know directly.
Javac
That one guy
If you have questions or comments in regard to this post please email me at DR-JAVAC@play.net.
HASTALUEGO
Re: Spell Changes
02/09/2018 09:35 AM CST
>>IP change means that it doesn't trigger stun hiders any more. That's a good thing
It wont trigger stun hiders but also reduces the overall defensive hit.
>>Anc means you can tank someone's evasion and then lb them. That's a beast thing
Anc has an environmental hindrance that makes it unusable in a good number of rooms.
>>Typical kneejerk rage reaction from people that haven't even tested it yet
More like typical questioning from people who know how their spells work.
It wont trigger stun hiders but also reduces the overall defensive hit.
>>Anc means you can tank someone's evasion and then lb them. That's a beast thing
Anc has an environmental hindrance that makes it unusable in a good number of rooms.
>>Typical kneejerk rage reaction from people that haven't even tested it yet
More like typical questioning from people who know how their spells work.
JULIAN
Re: Spell Changes
02/09/2018 09:40 AM CST
Javac,
I will say that Anther's environmental restriction can be pretty annoying (this was true before you changed it, too) and it's sometimes hard to predict from looking at a room whether it will work or not.
Mazrian
I will say that Anther's environmental restriction can be pretty annoying (this was true before you changed it, too) and it's sometimes hard to predict from looking at a room whether it will work or not.
Mazrian
DR-JAVAC
Re: Spell Changes
02/09/2018 09:53 AM CST
Please give me an example of a room where it fails unexpectedly so I can investgate. There might be a bug, either with the spell or with some rooms. Best bet is to use BUG in the room, so it gives us more info about the room to investigate. Messaging for how it fails would be good, too.
Javac
That one guy
If you have questions or comments in regard to this post please email me at DR-JAVAC@play.net.
Javac
That one guy
If you have questions or comments in regard to this post please email me at DR-JAVAC@play.net.
ELSBETH
Re: Spell Changes
02/09/2018 10:05 AM CST
>>More like typical questioning from people who know how their spells work.
Stunned
Being stunned completely prevents all actions. It also lowers balance and has a chance to cause a prepared spell to be lost. The balance hit can be enough to cause the prone status. Some special abilities can break out of a stun.
Immobile
Being rendered immobile completely prevents all actions. It does not have the balance hit or chance to lose a spell that a stun has, however.
You're not losing the balance hit in the immobilization because it still causes someone to be prone and immobilize can't be broken as easy as stun can
Perune, I know you're greatly feared in the pvp community but no, you don't seem to know how your spells work
Stunned
Being stunned completely prevents all actions. It also lowers balance and has a chance to cause a prepared spell to be lost. The balance hit can be enough to cause the prone status. Some special abilities can break out of a stun.
Immobile
Being rendered immobile completely prevents all actions. It does not have the balance hit or chance to lose a spell that a stun has, however.
You're not losing the balance hit in the immobilization because it still causes someone to be prone and immobilize can't be broken as easy as stun can
Perune, I know you're greatly feared in the pvp community but no, you don't seem to know how your spells work
SHIFT3
Re: Spell Changes
02/09/2018 10:06 AM CST
> 2. As previously mentioned, Anther's environmental wonkiness could make the new addition a bench warmer.
Speaking of which, can we see the environmental restrictions changed, maybe as a skill check to summoning?
You can summon a stone shard out of nothing. Why not summon a stone rock that you then turn to mud. Same with tremor and the indoors restriction.
SHIFT3
Re: Spell Changes
02/09/2018 10:14 AM CST
Or.... summoning an earth domain makes it so you can use all earth spells in the room regardless of penalty.
NASTY8
Re: Spell Changes
02/09/2018 10:25 AM CST
>> and has a chance to cause a prepared spell to be lost
This is the key loss here. We now have to cast 2 spells to accomplish what IP did before. In a pvp setting, this can be the difference between winning and losing. But what do I know.
-Nate
This is the key loss here. We now have to cast 2 spells to accomplish what IP did before. In a pvp setting, this can be the difference between winning and losing. But what do I know.
-Nate
ELSBETH
Re: Spell Changes
02/09/2018 10:30 AM CST
I'd rather someone not be able to break an immobilize and be prone. With wm burst they'll be dead before the immobilize wears off and they can get a spell off. If they're not you have bigger problems.
Nobody goes into a fight with ip and uses it with the intent of making another person lose a spell. It just doesn't happen. You're doing it to stop all action and attack. A nice side effect? Sure. A game breaker? Absolutely not.
Nobody goes into a fight with ip and uses it with the intent of making another person lose a spell. It just doesn't happen. You're doing it to stop all action and attack. A nice side effect? Sure. A game breaker? Absolutely not.
JULIAN
Re: Spell Changes
02/09/2018 10:45 AM CST
>>I'd rather someone not be able to break an immobilize and be prone. With wm burst they'll be dead before the immobilize wears off and they can get a spell off. If they're not you have bigger problems.<<
>>Nobody goes into a fight with ip and uses it with the intent of making another person lose a spell. It just doesn't happen. You're doing it to stop all action and attack. A nice side effect? Sure. A game breaker? Absolutely not.<<
IDK who Elsbeth is but yeah all of this is true.
Plus if you want to stun someone for whatever reason you can cast Arc Light instead, with the possible benefit that it's a vs stamina contest instead of vs reflex.
Mazrian
>>Nobody goes into a fight with ip and uses it with the intent of making another person lose a spell. It just doesn't happen. You're doing it to stop all action and attack. A nice side effect? Sure. A game breaker? Absolutely not.<<
IDK who Elsbeth is but yeah all of this is true.
Plus if you want to stun someone for whatever reason you can cast Arc Light instead, with the possible benefit that it's a vs stamina contest instead of vs reflex.
Mazrian
MOD-IRISTI
Re: Spell Changes **NUDGE**
02/09/2018 10:51 AM CST
Please avoid the snarking on one another and focus on the changes to the mentioned spells. Thank you.
Iristi
DragonRealms Board Monitor
Any questions or comments, please contact me at MOD-Iristi@play.net or Senior Board Monitor Helje at DR-Helje@play.net.
Iristi
DragonRealms Board Monitor
Any questions or comments, please contact me at MOD-Iristi@play.net or Senior Board Monitor Helje at DR-Helje@play.net.
FAMEBRIGHT
Re: Spell Changes
02/09/2018 11:27 AM CST
While I don't, for dumb flavor reasons, want to grow out of envrionmental restrictions I would be very happy with a sufficiently powerful domain nullifying them. That seems like a fair opportunity cost and also evokes some of the flavor we lost when spell synergy was scrapped.
"Warrior Mages don't bother covering up their disasters.
They're proud of them." -Raesh, on history
"Warrior Mages don't bother covering up their disasters.
They're proud of them." -Raesh, on history
HASTALUEGO
Re: Spell Changes
02/09/2018 02:04 PM CST
>>You're not losing the balance hit in the immobilization because it still causes someone to be prone and immobilize can't be broken as easy as stun can
I'm not under the impression that a balance hit is all that is going on with stun vs. immobilization.
>>Perune, I know you're greatly feared in the pvp community but no, you don't seem to know how your spells work
LOL. Please, inform the class of who you are teacher, so we can determine whether or not to respect your opinion on the matter.
I'm not under the impression that a balance hit is all that is going on with stun vs. immobilization.
>>Perune, I know you're greatly feared in the pvp community but no, you don't seem to know how your spells work
LOL. Please, inform the class of who you are teacher, so we can determine whether or not to respect your opinion on the matter.
DR-JAVAC
Re: Spell Changes
02/09/2018 02:27 PM CST
If someone wanted to test, old Ice Patch is still in the Test instance.
Javac
That one guy
If you have questions or comments in regard to this post please email me at DR-JAVAC@play.net.
Javac
That one guy
If you have questions or comments in regard to this post please email me at DR-JAVAC@play.net.
HASTALUEGO
Re: Spell Changes
02/09/2018 02:31 PM CST
>>If someone wanted to test, old Ice Patch is still in the Test instance.
Thanks Javac. I'll try and play around.
Thanks Javac. I'll try and play around.
JULIAN
Re: Spell Changes
02/09/2018 02:51 PM CST
>>If someone wanted to test, old Ice Patch is still in the Test instance.
Javac, can you say if the defense hit from a stun is more or less or the same as the defense hit from immobilization? I thought immobile was more but I've only got my vague recollection on that. Might help ground the discussion some.
Mazrian
Javac, can you say if the defense hit from a stun is more or less or the same as the defense hit from immobilization? I thought immobile was more but I've only got my vague recollection on that. Might help ground the discussion some.
Mazrian
ASHAMAN1
Re: Spell Changes
02/09/2018 03:04 PM CST
>>if the defense hit from a stun is more or less or the same as the defense hit from immobilization?
Combat3.x changed stuns. They don't have a defensive hit, the defensive loss is from the balance hit (It was deemed that losing all offensive ability was enough, so stuns don't penalize defense). Additionally, the balance hit is varied, not insta-craptastic. Stuns lost a LOT of teeth, and with stun hiders, are far less reliable for pvp.
Samsaren
Combat3.x changed stuns. They don't have a defensive hit, the defensive loss is from the balance hit (It was deemed that losing all offensive ability was enough, so stuns don't penalize defense). Additionally, the balance hit is varied, not insta-craptastic. Stuns lost a LOT of teeth, and with stun hiders, are far less reliable for pvp.
Samsaren
TEVESHSZAT
Re: Spell Changes
02/09/2018 05:05 PM CST
Would be interesting if Arc Light also dinged someone's concentration.
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.
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.
FLINT-TIPPED
Re: Spell Changes
02/09/2018 11:17 PM CST
>Would be interesting if Arc Light also dinged someone's concentration.
And Dazzle. More abilities to +/- (mostly -) concentration would be nice.
https://elanthipedia.play.net/Main_Page
And Dazzle. More abilities to +/- (mostly -) concentration would be nice.
https://elanthipedia.play.net/Main_Page
JULIAN
Re: Spell Changes
02/10/2018 10:50 AM CST
Hey, Javac!
While you're pokeing around WM spells for QOL changes and such, would you consider changing Rising Mists to not obscure room exits in the XML stream? That feature confuses a lot of automapper functionalities and while it's something that can be worked around, it's kind of a pain.
Mazrian
While you're pokeing around WM spells for QOL changes and such, would you consider changing Rising Mists to not obscure room exits in the XML stream? That feature confuses a lot of automapper functionalities and while it's something that can be worked around, it's kind of a pain.
Mazrian
URITEL
Re: Spell Changes
02/10/2018 11:13 AM CST
Just wanted to say that I've enjoyed the changes. Might actually use ANC now, and the negation of stun hiders with IP is a great boon. I'll sort of miss the chance of the other player losing their spell, but I far prefer the immobilization aspect over a stun. If I truly need the stun then I'll stick with arc light.
In regards to ANC's current conditions - I look forward to those being addressed and updated as they are encountered, but PVP wise I haven't noticed any areas in which I wasn't able to cast it. I definitely prefer having the opportunity to having an -evasion ability versus having two different stun spells.
DR-JAVAC
Re: Spell Changes
02/10/2018 02:10 PM CST
>Javac, can you say if the defense hit from a stun is more or less or the same as the defense hit from immobilization? I thought immobile was more but I've only got my vague recollection on that. Might help ground the discussion some.
Okay, I spoke with Kodius and he confirmed that Immobilization is a greater defensive penalty than Stuns, and gave me permission to share that info with you.
Javac
That one guy
If you have questions or comments in regard to this post please email me at DR-JAVAC@play.net.
Okay, I spoke with Kodius and he confirmed that Immobilization is a greater defensive penalty than Stuns, and gave me permission to share that info with you.
Javac
That one guy
If you have questions or comments in regard to this post please email me at DR-JAVAC@play.net.
ELSBETH
Re: Spell Changes
02/10/2018 02:25 PM CST
>>More like typical questioning from people who know how their spells work.
This is the funniest thing
This is the funniest thing
JHALIASCLERIC
Re: Spell Changes
02/10/2018 02:29 PM CST
Actually, if the intent of the Spell Changes was to start a semi-comprehensive rebalance, maybe opening the conversation up to players would be beneficial?
DR-SIGNI
Re: Spell Changes
02/10/2018 03:14 PM CST
I believe the moderator requested the bickering and snark to cease. This is the the last warning or this thread will be closed.
JULIAN
Re: Spell Changes
02/10/2018 03:53 PM CST
>>Okay, I spoke with Kodius and he confirmed that Immobilization is a greater defensive penalty than Stuns, and gave me permission to share that info with you.<<
Ok, thanks.
Mazrian
Ok, thanks.
Mazrian
ELSBETH
Re: Spell Changes
02/10/2018 04:02 PM CST
>>Actually, if the intent of the Spell Changes was to start a semi-comprehensive rebalance, maybe opening the conversation up to players would be beneficial?
Warrior mage spells got some love, they got a neat buff. This thread is just because some people in the mid level don't understand their abilities.
You don't even play a warrior mage,why are you demanding a conversation with a gm that's doing something beneficial for a guild that doesn't even effect you? What's next, complaining about the blindside changes that are beneficial for thieves just for the sake of feeling like you got your two cents in?
Warrior mage spells got some love, they got a neat buff. This thread is just because some people in the mid level don't understand their abilities.
You don't even play a warrior mage,why are you demanding a conversation with a gm that's doing something beneficial for a guild that doesn't even effect you? What's next, complaining about the blindside changes that are beneficial for thieves just for the sake of feeling like you got your two cents in?
DR-SIGNI
Re: Spell Changes
02/10/2018 04:37 PM CST
This thread is now over. Any further posts will be hidden.
-GameMaster Signi
-GameMaster Signi
