>are far more diverse than 'rp color flavoring' (my words).

I agree, but when you're limited at the outset by elemental "flavor", it's difficult to get a lot more flavorful/colorful than that. The SLR was the one lore review correctly done in my view. There are good tradeoffs to each type, but you can get most of the best of all with a 3 way split and reasonable lore thresholds. There's none of this 100+ rank requirement with a 4-way split to even remotely unlock any ability.

When talking about other lores and offensive power, I don't refer only to direct damage, but to all relevant limited duration boosters or other AS/CS booster spells with their self-refreshing benefits (240, 340, 1117, 117, 307, 211, 215). Looking across the board at a cleric, empath, or sorcerer, a lot more than a single direct damage lore contributes to their post-cap lethality. Sorcerers have this to a lesser extent, but they still benefit from demonology offensively with the contribution to balefire and access to demons that assist directly in combat situations, unlike our completely mechanically useless familiars.

There is no enchant bonus for using a familiar. There is a penalty for not having the familiar with you when you enchant if you have one summoned.

<<There is no enchant bonus for using a familiar. There is a penalty for not having the familiar with you when you enchant if you have one summoned.

Hmm... if that's true, the wiki is wrong. But either way, 920 is a cool spell that I've certainly found useful.

The wiki is wrong about many things.

Sorcerers don't need lore to anchor/save locations or a player target, which makes Planar Shift a far superior spell to Familiar Gate.

Even bards can anchor 1020 without needing 50 lore ranks like wizards do.

>>Sorcerers don't need lore to anchor/save locations or a player target, which makes Planar Shift a far superior spell to Familiar Gate.

>>Even bards can anchor 1020 without needing 50 lore ranks like wizards do.



Well, when you put it like that, yeah. But let's compare the whole scope of it, not just the choice bits.

740 has, at best training, a 1% chance to not cause pretty substantial damage to the caster (which 930 does as well,) but also the chance of summoning a demon which presents all sorts of other dangers. Sure, 1%, but still.

Bards pretty much only get to go to a set number of locations. Where as a wizard's familiar, baring anti-teleportation rooms, can go just about anywhere.

It's great that you're enjoying things. No need to make changes for you. However, many post-cap wizards have said they don't enjoy the profession any longer. So... we're looking for changes or a profession change option.

We've had this discussion literally 100 times, and just the last few days in the Dev folder. I'm not going to repeat it.

I'm looking for the same tools every other post-cap profession in the game, except monks, enjoys. People don't have to hunt a certain way if they don't choose to, but I disagree with forcing mediocre hunting on everyone just to create a challenge.

If my wizard was going to enjoy the same abilities as I had 5 years ago pre-cap, I would have stopped playing long ago.

I don't agree with your fundamental assertion that you should have "the same tools every other post-cap profession" in a class-based game. If everything is the same, there's no interesting choices. Also, I find it almost impossible to believe that every post-cap class other than monks and wizards have "the same tools."

This isn't me playing semantics games, this is ineffective communication. How am I supposed to know that "same tools" means "single target instant kill"?

Also, I disagree with the assumption that every class should have an instant-kill spell. In fact, I'd call that hypothetical state broken. And if it's really true that every non-monk, non-wizard class just walks around post-cap typing "kill <thing>", then I'd say the game is broken post-cap, not wizards.

>I have no interest in the race to the bottom.

Hmmmm....an interesting idea. You create a new character and get to spec it out however you want for a level 100 character, but every action you do earns you a little bit of experience. Once you have earned enough experience to level you actually lose a level and you need to decide what skills/spells to unlearn.

The first person to go from level 100 to 1 wins Gemstone forever!

-Drumpel

>The wiki is exactly correct in regard to the bonus and penalty for familiars.

Thanks for the clarification. I was pretty sure at some point in the past, another NIR had posted the opposite, but it's good to know how things currently function with the updated spell.

I'd just like to say that I disagree with everything Curtis has posted so far. Fleurs is correct as to what the problems are, as usual.

<<I'd just like to say that I disagree with everything Curtis has posted so far. Fleurs is correct as to what the problems are, as usual.

I started typing up a longer reply to this, but then I stopped myself, asked what I was doing with my time and decided to just stop reading this stuff instead.

Well, it is difficult to have a decent conversation when the same person wearing different faces come in to confirm their other persona's opinion, and rebuke all others that are in disagreement. I think you're probably wise in letting it rest, since the conversation was going no where.

Ideas are meant to be debated, as Sleken said these are discussion forums. As Methais said, if ideas are bad, I'll also say so because I have no desire to be told this is what we asked for like with the ELR. This isn't anything personal, and my comments are only about the topics being discussed.

I disagree with forcing wizards down a development path contrary to the precedent set by every other pure profession (cooldowns on offensive spells) and with a more limited power ceiling at the single target offensive level than any other post-cap profession. I'm not asking for every class to be the same. I'm asking for parity, because one class shouldn't suddenly be told that we're only allowed to aspire to be enchanting bots post-cap and that's it. Much of this game unfortunately involves heavy combat. From pay quests from Troubled Waters to Reim, repetitive and grind-heavy events such as Duskruin, and all the new hunting areas being developed. I don't need to play post-cap so I can just sit in TSC and RP.

Some people and Dev may be offended that some post-cap wizard players don't like the changes we've been presented with, but it's equally disheartening as a paying customer who's spent over a decade on a character to be told that this is it and it's time to move on to another profession. I wouldn't be posting about it if it wasn't a matter important to me, but equally as such, I don't post in any profession folders where I don't have a post-cap character. In my opinion, those pre-cap can easily adapt, while it's those post-cap who have put a lot into the game, whether it's actual time and money with the character, gear, customization, etc.

No one likes to say it, but the character trading that goes on is a huge part of the problem. If every wizard character retired whose original player left and wasn't simply sold to be someone else's pocket bot, you'd have a far better idea of how the changes are viewed. Many people have just bought a capped character of another profession and moved on. I refuse to go down that path out of principle. I refuse to turn to Lich and heavy script hunting to bypass the tedium that is most punitive to those who actually manually play the game and stop to interact with others. I disagree that just because maybe I'm the only one who doesn't do either of these things, it's good design to continue down this path that eliminates the things that made GemStone unique and not like every other generic game on the market.

I forgot to mention it, but I would also make it so that bolt AS is no longer affected by spirit loss.

>If your goal is really to improve wizards and you recognize devs as the humans they are, is this the best way to achieve that result? There's this tendency among smart people to treat emotions as "bad" and assert that the best people operate like some kind of Vulcans. (I know because sometimes I catch myself doing it.) The problem is it's not real life. People have emotions (and that's good!) and pouring your heart and soul into something (as I can confidently say game devs generally do) to be told "this sucks and if that makes you feel bad, it's your fault" is not only unlikely to achieve your results, it's also a bit uncaring, to be honest.

Well I mean we fought tooth and nail over it since the day the ELR details were announced and just about all of it got ignored. This was well before it went live. We pointed out various problems with what was on the table, explained why it was a problem, usually with numbers/data to back it up, etc., So it's not like things were set in stone when we first started pointing out problems. It's simply a matter of almost all of our feedback got completely ignored and these huge nerfs got rammed down our throats anyway with nothing in place to offset the damage it caused.

The only nerf I can "agree" with (though not really, but I understand the reasoning) is the 0 RT Rapid Fire nerf.

Now try reversing the situation. Spend 20 years building up a character and then have its most powerful tools (which are not only tools but also band-aids for an otherwise broken system in 515's case) nerfed into the ground in favor of a bunch of underwhelming RNG slot machine proc mechanics, a bunch of flawed (imo) reasoning attached to it, and then over a year later still waiting for the fixes (to bolts, since they insist we use them) to come in RSN and tell me how you'd react.

Yes, 917 and 520 are spectacular additions, and 520's lore implementation should be the gold standard for how our lores are handled with our other spells. But dev is hell bent on us bolting as our primary attack, and the bolting system has had none of its underlying issues addressed, which become much more prevalent in the post-cap game. That's a problem.

Especially since even pre-nerf 519 with 202 fire lore would still get circles run around it by a fresh cap cleric/empath casting 240/317/1115 even with much lower warding margins. Post nerf, even without 240, 317 still almost always outperforms Immolate (thought admittedly, my testing on that hasn't been all that extensive), and with much lower lore thresholds to max its benefits than what Immolate requires (150 ranks). Which now that I'm thinking about it, are there any non-wizard spells that require 150 lore to max its benefits? If not, I'm curious what the second highest spell is and how much lore it requires to max.

That's just the tip of the iceberg. But again, this has all been posted in great detail 483790487329023 times since the ELR. I wish we could just add a sticky post to the top of the folder with all of this in it, since it tends to be on a 2 week repeat cycle.

>With that said- I'd love a way for 930 (and familiars in general) to work cross-realm. Maybe that could be one of those "high end" lore benefits people were discussing?

This has been brought up several times since the teleportation changes were announced. To my knowledge, we haven't been told anything one way or another as to whether 930 will be part of it or not.

>I'd start to get worried if a class was so far behind others, that you look foolish for playing it. But I don't think that's the case here?

Pretty sure monks still have a monopoly on that.

>The first person to go from level 100 to 1 wins Gemstone forever!

And if you decay you gain 10k experience.

>For example, wizards can become much better enchanters, right?

If a wizard trains 1x in the wizard circle and 2x MIU while leveling up, they're for the most part going to be the "best" enchanter possible as soon as they turn 100. And if you want to speed it up via water lore, you'll be doing a lot of hunting.

I mean if logging in once every 2 weeks or so to do a cast on a major project is your idea of end game wizard fun, more power to you. The other 99.99999999% of active non-bot wizards will probably disagree though.

>Well, it is difficult to have a decent conversation when the same person wearing different faces come in to confirm their other persona's opinion, and rebuke all others that are in disagreement. I think you're probably wise in letting it rest, since the conversation was going no where.

gg making baseless accusations because someone else agreed with someone you disagreed with. Is this seriously where we are now?

>I don't need to play post-cap so I can just sit in TSC and RP.

That's only cause you haven't RP'd with me in TSC.

It goes something like this:

[Town Square Central]
Fat empaths everywhere and some random noob picking boxes.
Obvious paths: northeast, east, southeast, southwest, west, northwest

Methais just arrived.

(Methais roleplays all over the place.)

>roleplay nominate methais



~ Methais

>That would effectively make it a CS spell and not a bolt, which people and devs have stated they did not want.

Bolt damage gets mitigated by redux and armor. CS spells do not.

Bolt damage scales a lot worse than most warding spells on similar end rolls even before factoring in armor/redux.

You don't gain bolt AS by gaining a level. CS spells you do.

Bolts have to deal with EBP. CS spells do not.

Bolt AS is based on different stats and training than CS spells are.

CS is based on level + spell ranks. Bolts are based spell aim.

Bolt DS is generated differently than TD.

You can continue to increase your CS after you reach level 100 (because nobody has 303 ranks when they cap). Bolts, not so much.

Along with 38047830 other things that I'm too lazy to type out.

A car is effectively a boat because they both use gasoline powered engines and have a steering wheel.

Wizards are effectively rangers because they both use mana.

etc.

~ Methais