Previous Thread
Expand All
Collapse All
Ignore Author
Reply
Well, I had a long post all written out, but then got to doing something else and lost it. So I'll keep it shorter.
<<It seems to be decently powerful against the target audience, it's just that it's the most limited audience out of any other combat spell hands down.>>
After actually retesting the spell since the rewrite, I retract my previous statement.
Anyway, after a recent trip to zombies/greater skeletons, I've come to the conclusion that PLS is vastly underpowered at level. It took me on average two (sometimes more) 30 mana casts (near the peak of my ability) to kill zombies. Each cast yielded 5 pulses. Not only does the spell not do very much damage, but it works rather slowly. Figure the time to prep, cast, and let the spell work before having to do it again and again to the same critter, we're talking minutes.
It only does vitality damage, when it should probably be doing internal wounds as well. Would be nice to see the buggers consume a whole leg and cause the target to topple over or collapse or something.
I have significantly more PM skill than weapon skill. You know it's bad when a spell with such a narrow and specialized scope doesn't even perform it's intended function well. I'd rank it with grizzly claw at the bottom of the barrel of combat spells. Why bother making direct damage combat spells if they're going to be for novelty only. Token combat spells at best.
I think one new flaw lies in that it is now a spell vs agility rather than spell vs stamina, but thats just a guess. A webbed zombie died in one 30 mana cast (albiet it took the whole 5 pulses) after it was on the ground immobalized.
It can't be stacked, so only one cast can be going on a target at a time. Need to wait for the scriptedness of the duration to wear of. This greatly hinders the amount of damage the spell can do over a given time.
As for the power boost uhh, I've said it before and I'll say it again, it costs more mana than it would save. Not really a valuable function at all.
For those curious PLS does knock undead off balance. Also, there is a window to skin/search inbetween first decomposing message after the critter dies and the final consumption.
Bottom line, the spell is simply ill-concieved. With very few good points, it is plagued by many, many flaws. I'm just glad it isn't a prereq for anything, but wish Rigby's time had been spent productively on a more useful spell. If branch break and swarm are going to be anything like PLS and GRIZ, for the love of god stop now and stick to skill/ability based spells for us.
Are we going to get any feedback on this? What kind of "monitoring" is going on?
Dritz
>Are we going to get any feedback on this? What kind of "monitoring" is going on?
>Dritz
I would like to know the answer to that question too.
I would also like to know from the GM's, what their vision is of Ranger Offensive combat spells. Honestly. I'm not trying to be mean or sling an attitude, I would honestly like to know.
Global preview is coming to an end, and this information, given by a GM would help greatly in the way I will plan out my spell selection.
Before the re-write, most of our offensive combat spells actually did something, IF you had enough magic to make them work. Now, they are as Dritz put it, Token spells. Look pretty and do absolutely nothing with the exception (and very happy with it) of HB.
Now I get the feeling that the GM's over all do not see Rangers has having the ability to possess Offensive Combat spells. Why? Is this because we are Tert magic? That should make no differance, we work hard, harder even for the ranks we obtain in magic. Our spells, with sufficient skills should be powerful, more powerful then our critter opponent that is for certain.
Not a guild-v-guild thing, just a comparison here, A high level Warmie can cast a first tiered FireShard spell, with very little mana considering the Warmies circle, and completely explode a difficult critters head. A high level Ranger (yes we DO have a few), with high Magical skills can cast a very high preped Griz and cast it on a critter, the spell MIGHT scratch it. Or a high preped PLS, and with 5 pulses from that DOT spell, it might be slightly battered? What's wrong with this picture?
Jent, when you first took control of the Guild, you said you had big plans for Ranger magic. Basically that there are sooo many things that Life mana can do, that the physical power of nature was overwhelming. And it is. Yet we get some very weak combat spells? There are not many things in the world that can stand against a Hurricane or a Tornado, or have you seen the devastation a mud-slide can cause or an avalanche? Nature is, next to man, the single most destructive force out there, and Rangers are a part of nature, LIFE and therefore Life Mana is a part of nature.
I am extremely happy with our 'buff' spells. Yet, a cleric's buffs are more powerful, go figure. I am extrememly happy with HB, you all did a fantastic job on it ::applauds::. Yet it is rather disappointing to see the way our other (2 so far I think) combat spells have been seriously limited, while other guilds had theirs seriously increased. It saddens me greatly.
It is very disheartening to see that the promise of, at least a close balance in this game made by the GMs has not been fulfilled, if anything, it has been more unbalanced in regards to Magic.
An answer from a GM would be appreciated.
Thank you
Motarra
>Dritz
I would like to know the answer to that question too.
I would also like to know from the GM's, what their vision is of Ranger Offensive combat spells. Honestly. I'm not trying to be mean or sling an attitude, I would honestly like to know.
Global preview is coming to an end, and this information, given by a GM would help greatly in the way I will plan out my spell selection.
Before the re-write, most of our offensive combat spells actually did something, IF you had enough magic to make them work. Now, they are as Dritz put it, Token spells. Look pretty and do absolutely nothing with the exception (and very happy with it) of HB.
Now I get the feeling that the GM's over all do not see Rangers has having the ability to possess Offensive Combat spells. Why? Is this because we are Tert magic? That should make no differance, we work hard, harder even for the ranks we obtain in magic. Our spells, with sufficient skills should be powerful, more powerful then our critter opponent that is for certain.
Not a guild-v-guild thing, just a comparison here, A high level Warmie can cast a first tiered FireShard spell, with very little mana considering the Warmies circle, and completely explode a difficult critters head. A high level Ranger (yes we DO have a few), with high Magical skills can cast a very high preped Griz and cast it on a critter, the spell MIGHT scratch it. Or a high preped PLS, and with 5 pulses from that DOT spell, it might be slightly battered? What's wrong with this picture?
Jent, when you first took control of the Guild, you said you had big plans for Ranger magic. Basically that there are sooo many things that Life mana can do, that the physical power of nature was overwhelming. And it is. Yet we get some very weak combat spells? There are not many things in the world that can stand against a Hurricane or a Tornado, or have you seen the devastation a mud-slide can cause or an avalanche? Nature is, next to man, the single most destructive force out there, and Rangers are a part of nature, LIFE and therefore Life Mana is a part of nature.
I am extremely happy with our 'buff' spells. Yet, a cleric's buffs are more powerful, go figure. I am extrememly happy with HB, you all did a fantastic job on it ::applauds::. Yet it is rather disappointing to see the way our other (2 so far I think) combat spells have been seriously limited, while other guilds had theirs seriously increased. It saddens me greatly.
It is very disheartening to see that the promise of, at least a close balance in this game made by the GMs has not been fulfilled, if anything, it has been more unbalanced in regards to Magic.
An answer from a GM would be appreciated.
Thank you
Motarra
rangers will never be the gods of all magic, their magic won't be the most destructive. Now I agree with you that it should cause atleast some damage but the way magic 2.1 works is that all magic users require roughly the same amount of pm to affect the target.
And if you have 200 weapons and 300 magic, those 300 magic ranks are actually behind your weapon ranks, only time magic and weapons are on a almost equal rank per rank basis is targetted magic so if it takes 150 in a weapon to hit something you better have over 200 magic if you even wanna scuff it
ohh and don't bother trying to compare any magic with FS the GMs themselves have already said its too powerful, first tier warmie spells put all of their other spells to shame, don't ever have to go past the first few tiers. Compare grizzly claw with a moon mage spell or the Smites to get a better idea of it, compare PLS to the cleric spells, both have near the same limited audiance I'll be it PLS has an even smaller one
And if you have 200 weapons and 300 magic, those 300 magic ranks are actually behind your weapon ranks, only time magic and weapons are on a almost equal rank per rank basis is targetted magic so if it takes 150 in a weapon to hit something you better have over 200 magic if you even wanna scuff it
ohh and don't bother trying to compare any magic with FS the GMs themselves have already said its too powerful, first tier warmie spells put all of their other spells to shame, don't ever have to go past the first few tiers. Compare grizzly claw with a moon mage spell or the Smites to get a better idea of it, compare PLS to the cleric spells, both have near the same limited audiance I'll be it PLS has an even smaller one
ponders LB, ALA, DB, FB
thats 4 but you don't need 250 PM to use those unless you mean MAB but then you'd have to count in IP so that'd make 6....
thats 2 or 4 more then what you think <g>
Fireshard was downtweaked yes, but its still more powerful then it should be, first tier and stronger then ALA, FB, and LB it doesn't go with the higher tier more power structure of Magic 2.1 but what would I know right
ohh and you should get some sleep, with all that yawning your face is beginning to look flush and your eyes bloodshot <g>
thats 4 but you don't need 250 PM to use those unless you mean MAB but then you'd have to count in IP so that'd make 6....
thats 2 or 4 more then what you think <g>
Fireshard was downtweaked yes, but its still more powerful then it should be, first tier and stronger then ALA, FB, and LB it doesn't go with the higher tier more power structure of Magic 2.1 but what would I know right
ohh and you should get some sleep, with all that yawning your face is beginning to look flush and your eyes bloodshot <g>
<<After actually retesting the spell since the rewrite, I retract my previous statement. Anyway, after a recent trip to zombies/greater skeletons, I've come to the conclusion that PLS is vastly underpowered at level. It took me on average two (sometimes more) 30 mana casts (near the peak of my ability) to kill zombies. Each cast yielded 5 pulses. Not only does the spell not do very much damage, but it works rather slowly. Figure the time to prep, cast, and let the spell work before having to do it again and again to the same critter, we're talking minutes. Bottom line, the spell is simply ill-concieved. With very few good points, it is plagued by many, many flaws. I'm just glad it isn't a prereq for anything, but wish Rigby's time had been spent productively on a more useful spell. If branch break and swarm are going to be anything like PLS and GRIZ, for the love of god stop now and stick to skill/ability based spells for us.>>
"Bottom line" is you have a "Fatal Flaw" in your testing. Also if you want to get in to details here please post your stats/ranks or at least "ballparks" so we can look at it.
<<Are we going to get any feedback on this? What kind of "monitoring" is going on?>>
I peeked at it and I'll ask Raenek to look further but the spell falls in line with the magic system. Actually it is at the top end of power based on the amount of targets it can effect but again your testing is off.
Later,
Jent
"Bottom line" is you have a "Fatal Flaw" in your testing. Also if you want to get in to details here please post your stats/ranks or at least "ballparks" so we can look at it.
<<Are we going to get any feedback on this? What kind of "monitoring" is going on?>>
I peeked at it and I'll ask Raenek to look further but the spell falls in line with the magic system. Actually it is at the top end of power based on the amount of targets it can effect but again your testing is off.
Later,
Jent
<<I would also like to know from the GM's, what their vision is of Ranger Offensive combat spells. Honestly. I'm not trying to be mean or sling an attitude, I would honestly like to know.>>
I'll post more on the Ranger Boards.
<<Global preview is coming to an end, and this information, given by a GM would help greatly in the way I will plan out my spell selection.>>
That is going to be difficult since the wish list we sent to Rigby has not and will not be approved for a while.
Thanks,
Jent
I'll post more on the Ranger Boards.
<<Global preview is coming to an end, and this information, given by a GM would help greatly in the way I will plan out my spell selection.>>
That is going to be difficult since the wish list we sent to Rigby has not and will not be approved for a while.
Thanks,
Jent
<< "Bottom line" is you have a "Fatal Flaw" in your testing. Also if you want to get in to details here please post your stats/ranks or at least "ballparks" so we can look at it.>>
What is my fatal flaw? That I'm actually trying to use it on something I can learn from?
And don't pretend you don't know my stats and ranks, cause it's yer job to and I know you check em.
Thanks for checking though. But if it falls into the high end of the global caps like you say it does, I'll stick to my suggestion that it's a waste of time to make direct damage combat spells for rangers. Face it, they will never even come close to TM spells, or spells that utilize TM in some way. I think it was either Rigby or Damissak that practically said as much after 2.0 rolled in.
Dritz
What is my fatal flaw? That I'm actually trying to use it on something I can learn from?
And don't pretend you don't know my stats and ranks, cause it's yer job to and I know you check em.
Thanks for checking though. But if it falls into the high end of the global caps like you say it does, I'll stick to my suggestion that it's a waste of time to make direct damage combat spells for rangers. Face it, they will never even come close to TM spells, or spells that utilize TM in some way. I think it was either Rigby or Damissak that practically said as much after 2.0 rolled in.
Dritz
>> What is my fatal flaw?
That you are testing against creatures which 'flex' so there is no way for us to duplicate / substantiate the test?
>> That I'm actually trying to use it on something I can learn from?
Learn what from? Evasion? By that logic, a WM should be successful evading anything they need to hunt to learn TM from?
>> they will never even come close to TM spells, or spells that utilize TM in some way. I think it was either Rigby or Damissak that practically said as much after 2.0 rolled in.
Actually, it was stated that TM spells would be the premier offensive attack spells.
>> I'll stick to my suggestion that it's a waste of time to make direct damage combat spells for rangers.
If they don't benefit you in any way, don't choose them.
GM Damissak
That you are testing against creatures which 'flex' so there is no way for us to duplicate / substantiate the test?
>> That I'm actually trying to use it on something I can learn from?
Learn what from? Evasion? By that logic, a WM should be successful evading anything they need to hunt to learn TM from?
>> they will never even come close to TM spells, or spells that utilize TM in some way. I think it was either Rigby or Damissak that practically said as much after 2.0 rolled in.
Actually, it was stated that TM spells would be the premier offensive attack spells.
>> I'll stick to my suggestion that it's a waste of time to make direct damage combat spells for rangers.
If they don't benefit you in any way, don't choose them.
GM Damissak
Just a couple of comments,
I'll be surprised if the take up of PLS is great, the spell itself it way to limiting and I find the power/ benefits of the spell lame. On certain islands the spell is all but pointless.
Spells slots are hard gained and to give one to obtain this spell in my view would be very unwise.
We are a survival guild, we require skinning, disarm and lockpicking to name a few. If I cast PLS and the body goes poof the body where are the box's to train from...
I also find it offensive of Jent to ask Dritz to post his stats in a means to shut him up, and it was a means to shut him up in my view. If the ranger guild leader doesn't know the stats and skills of the highest member of his guild then we are in a worst state than I thought.
Shan
I'll be surprised if the take up of PLS is great, the spell itself it way to limiting and I find the power/ benefits of the spell lame. On certain islands the spell is all but pointless.
Spells slots are hard gained and to give one to obtain this spell in my view would be very unwise.
We are a survival guild, we require skinning, disarm and lockpicking to name a few. If I cast PLS and the body goes poof the body where are the box's to train from...
I also find it offensive of Jent to ask Dritz to post his stats in a means to shut him up, and it was a means to shut him up in my view. If the ranger guild leader doesn't know the stats and skills of the highest member of his guild then we are in a worst state than I thought.
Shan
>> I also find it offensive of Jent to ask Dritz to post his stats in a means to shut him up, and it was a means to shut him up in my view. If the ranger guild leader doesn't know the stats and skills of the highest member of his guild then we are in a worst state than I thought.
He asked in response to a request from the Magic team (that more information be given to support issues raised). You can attempt to surmise whatever motive you wish from the request. Many times when following up on a post, the poster is no longer in the game (making it impossible to do any follow up).
Beyond that, if you don't wish to give information or close approximations there are several other options. Those options include BUG (ingame), feedback, (in some cases) direct email, etc.
GM Damissak
He asked in response to a request from the Magic team (that more information be given to support issues raised). You can attempt to surmise whatever motive you wish from the request. Many times when following up on a post, the poster is no longer in the game (making it impossible to do any follow up).
Beyond that, if you don't wish to give information or close approximations there are several other options. Those options include BUG (ingame), feedback, (in some cases) direct email, etc.
GM Damissak
<<And don't pretend you don't know my stats and ranks, cause it's yer job to and I know you check em.>>
True, and I also wear the armor you make. The point was that you are testing on a critter that will "flex." Further, had you posted some round about stats we might not have seen the lynch mob on the boards.
When folks with 100's of ranks less than you do start posting about how they are seeing the same problem I start banging my head against my monitor. Had you tested the spell on critter Y instead of flexing critter X and then posted your results they would have realized that the spell has a kick to it. Granted not as big of a kick as you would like to see but the difference should have been noticeable.
<<Face it, they will never even come close to TM spells, or spells that utilize TM in some way.>>
Perhaps but I am very pleased with the way Ranger Magic has turned out.
<<I'll stick to my suggestion that it's a waste of time to make direct damage combat spells for rangers.>>
I wouldn't say a waste of time for everyone, maybe for you who no doubt took the biggest hit of any Ranger in the magic rewrite but not for every Ranger. Though to a certain extent I agree with you. We are not the "Mighty Spell Slingers" of the realms, that title is reserved for another guild.
We (The Ranger Team) have already submitted our list of proposed spells to Rigby. Hopefully you will find at least one of the useful.
Later,
Jent
True, and I also wear the armor you make. The point was that you are testing on a critter that will "flex." Further, had you posted some round about stats we might not have seen the lynch mob on the boards.
When folks with 100's of ranks less than you do start posting about how they are seeing the same problem I start banging my head against my monitor. Had you tested the spell on critter Y instead of flexing critter X and then posted your results they would have realized that the spell has a kick to it. Granted not as big of a kick as you would like to see but the difference should have been noticeable.
<<Face it, they will never even come close to TM spells, or spells that utilize TM in some way.>>
Perhaps but I am very pleased with the way Ranger Magic has turned out.
<<I'll stick to my suggestion that it's a waste of time to make direct damage combat spells for rangers.>>
I wouldn't say a waste of time for everyone, maybe for you who no doubt took the biggest hit of any Ranger in the magic rewrite but not for every Ranger. Though to a certain extent I agree with you. We are not the "Mighty Spell Slingers" of the realms, that title is reserved for another guild.
We (The Ranger Team) have already submitted our list of proposed spells to Rigby. Hopefully you will find at least one of the useful.
Later,
Jent
<<I also find it offensive of Jent to ask Dritz to post his stats in a means to shut him up, and it was a means to shut him up in my view.>>
Okay, I really don't know you that well so I will hold off on my usual sarcastic rhetoric. Anyway, it wasn't a means to shut him up.
<<If the ranger guild leader doesn't know the stats and skills of the highest member of his guild then we are in a worst state than I thought.>>
Now come on! You serve me up 2 meatballs in one post.
Seriously, if you think we are in bad shape I don't know what to say. Roll up another character in another guild, get away from the Ranger Guild for a while, take a break. There are some great Guild Teams back here, all of them are kicking it up and working their tails off. I personally love what is going on in the Trader and Pallie guilds. This is a game and you should have fun. I'm sorry our Team is not providing that for you.
Later,
Jent
Okay, I really don't know you that well so I will hold off on my usual sarcastic rhetoric. Anyway, it wasn't a means to shut him up.
<<If the ranger guild leader doesn't know the stats and skills of the highest member of his guild then we are in a worst state than I thought.>>
Now come on! You serve me up 2 meatballs in one post.
Seriously, if you think we are in bad shape I don't know what to say. Roll up another character in another guild, get away from the Ranger Guild for a while, take a break. There are some great Guild Teams back here, all of them are kicking it up and working their tails off. I personally love what is going on in the Trader and Pallie guilds. This is a game and you should have fun. I'm sorry our Team is not providing that for you.
Later,
Jent
Thanks for the responses Jent. I just figured, since the zombies and skeleton's were genning to my cricle/stats/skills whatever, and they were essentially a fair fight for both my weapons and my defenses, that they would be a fair fight for my magic as well. The only non-flex undead anywhere near my skills are dinegos and germs, about 30 levels back. Yea, pls probably will do well against those, but I'm not sure how it would help me cause I kin squash them with weapons, and they really pose no threat in the first place (well, maybe swarms of 4 or more).
Anyway, I'm just really skeptical as far as ranger direct offensive combat magic being useful to high level rangers. HB is an excellent combat spell, because it doesn't focus on damage anymore, but instead to disabilitate.
Dritz
Anyway, I'm just really skeptical as far as ranger direct offensive combat magic being useful to high level rangers. HB is an excellent combat spell, because it doesn't focus on damage anymore, but instead to disabilitate.
Dritz
