Previous Thread
Expand All
Collapse All
Ignore Author
Reply
Looks like Cyclic exp is way too high currently. With a Necromancer in Test and the following skills:
Utility: 641
Arcane: 855
Using RoC @ 19 mana it only took 3 minutes from clear to reach:
Utility: 641 90% fascinated (25/34)
That is quite a bit faster then the live instances.
Elusive
mundus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur
With >400 utility, RoC at 10 mana taught me pretty well before I had to refresh it.
I don't really like correcting Cyclics this way though. Making you recast them doesn't change the fact that they're still easy xp. I think something needs to change with the recast over and over methodology for learning magic skills.
I don't really like correcting Cyclics this way though. Making you recast them doesn't change the fact that they're still easy xp. I think something needs to change with the recast over and over methodology for learning magic skills.
>>I think something needs to change with the recast over and over methodology for learning magic skills.
I agree, but what would you suggest as an alternative? Giving people faster locking would just catapult them to the end-game faster, which we all know isn't very well-fleshed-out right now.
In general, I love the idea of non-repetitive ways to learn - That's why treasure maps lock a handful of skills when you finally find the target location, and why other systems we're working on have high exp rewards but aren't repeatable. The grind is something that nobody loves, but it takes a lot of work that we're not quite ready to do yet. For now, it's what we have, and forcing you to pay attention to your cyclics if you want to keep using them to train is better than always-on experience.
>>Using RoC @ 19 mana it only took 3 minutes from clear to reach:
Yeah that looks like a bug. I'll investigate.
--
"The ninety and nine are with dreams, content but the hope of the world made new, is the hundredth man who is grimly bent on making those dreams come true." -E.A.P.
I agree, but what would you suggest as an alternative? Giving people faster locking would just catapult them to the end-game faster, which we all know isn't very well-fleshed-out right now.
In general, I love the idea of non-repetitive ways to learn - That's why treasure maps lock a handful of skills when you finally find the target location, and why other systems we're working on have high exp rewards but aren't repeatable. The grind is something that nobody loves, but it takes a lot of work that we're not quite ready to do yet. For now, it's what we have, and forcing you to pay attention to your cyclics if you want to keep using them to train is better than always-on experience.
>>Using RoC @ 19 mana it only took 3 minutes from clear to reach:
Yeah that looks like a bug. I'll investigate.
--
"The ninety and nine are with dreams, content but the hope of the world made new, is the hundredth man who is grimly bent on making those dreams come true." -E.A.P.
>I agree, but what would you suggest as an alternative? Giving people faster locking would just catapult them to the end-game faster, which we all know isn't very well-fleshed-out right now.
It'll be flogging a dead horse a bit, but I really like the idea of 'using' the spell to teach the spell type, for example, being in combat and training armor/evasion/parry/shield also trains Warding if you've a Warding spell up. That said, all that suggestion seems to do is remove any of the 'input effort' towards training these abilities, which ultimately isn't really a solution.
Part of the issue, I feel, is that thematically the idea of casting a spell and simply recasting it over and over is kind of silly. I'd rather see further interaction with those spells, like Clerics INFUSION, though I recognize that mechanically PREP MAF, CAST, PREP MAF, CAST, PREP MAF, CAST, is not any different than PREP MAF, CAST, INFUSE MAF 20, INFUSE MAF 20, INFUSE MAF 20, INFUSE MAF 20...
It just seems sort of unfortunate now that some guilds (achoo Necromancers!) are in a position to take 'spells that I'll use to train' instead of 'spells that help my character'.
It'll be flogging a dead horse a bit, but I really like the idea of 'using' the spell to teach the spell type, for example, being in combat and training armor/evasion/parry/shield also trains Warding if you've a Warding spell up. That said, all that suggestion seems to do is remove any of the 'input effort' towards training these abilities, which ultimately isn't really a solution.
Part of the issue, I feel, is that thematically the idea of casting a spell and simply recasting it over and over is kind of silly. I'd rather see further interaction with those spells, like Clerics INFUSION, though I recognize that mechanically PREP MAF, CAST, PREP MAF, CAST, PREP MAF, CAST, is not any different than PREP MAF, CAST, INFUSE MAF 20, INFUSE MAF 20, INFUSE MAF 20, INFUSE MAF 20...
It just seems sort of unfortunate now that some guilds (achoo Necromancers!) are in a position to take 'spells that I'll use to train' instead of 'spells that help my character'.
>>In general, I love the idea of non-repetitive ways to learn - That's why treasure maps lock a handful of skills when you finally find the target location, and why other systems we're working on have high exp rewards but aren't repeatable. The grind is something that nobody loves, but it takes a lot of work that we're not quite ready to do yet. For now, it's what we have, and forcing you to pay attention to your cyclics if you want to keep using them to train is better than always-on experience.<<
I think cyclics are going to turn out fine. I want to offer a user's perspective on magic learning from straight casts and maybe argue that what we had as a paradigm for 3.0 wasn't that bad and might be the best compromise - ie: basic spells teach forever and casts at whatever mana range also teach.
What you guys have done with 3.1 is consistent with the way learning in DR usually works, but there are some aspects of magic that don't work well with the "find a higher difficulty" paradigm of learning.
In combat, for instance, if your learning starts to slow down you go find a harder creature and fight that. And that's fine, because fighting the creature is the point.
In magic, though, I'm trying to use specific spells to get specific effects. If my Basic evasion booster stops teaching I can't go cast an Esoteric evasion booster instead. The thing that accomplishes that function for me just no longer teaches. I still have to cast that spell, though, because it's all I've got to fill that role. I don't have to go back and fight the creatures that don't teach me.
Over time, as my skill increases, more and more of the casting I have to do regardless of learning won't teach in the 3.1 paradigm. I still have to do it, because I need to buff, use utility spells, etc, it just does nothing for me. Instead I have to deliberately spam whatever I've got that will teach. That's sort of ok in the sense of not being unworkable but I think we'd both agree it's not optimal and it's not very fun.
It's kind of the same with having to cast at or near your personal cap. There's a lot of casting below my personal cap (100 mana for pretty much everything, for me) that I do for tactical reasons - debuff/debil something quickly, generate room effect, refresh buff, fill Elemental Charge pool, etc. None of those tactical reasons go away with a strict learning curve that punishes not casting at cap. I just get less exp or none for the casting I have to do, and have to make up the exp by deliberately spamming spells later. Like above, it's not game breaking but it's not optimal or fun.
The experience model of 3.0 is better - if you're taking the time and using the mana you're probably learning. I have to cast those easy spells, those spells below cap (sometimes). I don't have a choice. I have to spend the time and attunement no matter what the experience model is. 3.0 doesn't penalize me for that and it makes my magic using experience pretty smooth and unfrustrating. Would it be so bad to stay with something like that?
Mazrian
I think cyclics are going to turn out fine. I want to offer a user's perspective on magic learning from straight casts and maybe argue that what we had as a paradigm for 3.0 wasn't that bad and might be the best compromise - ie: basic spells teach forever and casts at whatever mana range also teach.
What you guys have done with 3.1 is consistent with the way learning in DR usually works, but there are some aspects of magic that don't work well with the "find a higher difficulty" paradigm of learning.
In combat, for instance, if your learning starts to slow down you go find a harder creature and fight that. And that's fine, because fighting the creature is the point.
In magic, though, I'm trying to use specific spells to get specific effects. If my Basic evasion booster stops teaching I can't go cast an Esoteric evasion booster instead. The thing that accomplishes that function for me just no longer teaches. I still have to cast that spell, though, because it's all I've got to fill that role. I don't have to go back and fight the creatures that don't teach me.
Over time, as my skill increases, more and more of the casting I have to do regardless of learning won't teach in the 3.1 paradigm. I still have to do it, because I need to buff, use utility spells, etc, it just does nothing for me. Instead I have to deliberately spam whatever I've got that will teach. That's sort of ok in the sense of not being unworkable but I think we'd both agree it's not optimal and it's not very fun.
It's kind of the same with having to cast at or near your personal cap. There's a lot of casting below my personal cap (100 mana for pretty much everything, for me) that I do for tactical reasons - debuff/debil something quickly, generate room effect, refresh buff, fill Elemental Charge pool, etc. None of those tactical reasons go away with a strict learning curve that punishes not casting at cap. I just get less exp or none for the casting I have to do, and have to make up the exp by deliberately spamming spells later. Like above, it's not game breaking but it's not optimal or fun.
The experience model of 3.0 is better - if you're taking the time and using the mana you're probably learning. I have to cast those easy spells, those spells below cap (sometimes). I don't have a choice. I have to spend the time and attunement no matter what the experience model is. 3.0 doesn't penalize me for that and it makes my magic using experience pretty smooth and unfrustrating. Would it be so bad to stay with something like that?
Mazrian
>>In magic, though, I'm trying to use specific spells to get specific effects. If my Basic evasion booster stops teaching I can't go cast an Esoteric evasion booster instead. The thing that accomplishes that function for me just no longer teaches. I still have to cast that spell, though, because it's all I've got to fill that role. I don't have to go back and fight the creatures that don't teach me.
HUGE ++++ supporting what Maz said. I basically got to find different spells to train while at the same time cast spells that may not train for their effects cus well... thats the whole point of using spell X instead of Y.
The 3.1 concept does not work well for anything but TM bases spells and only if you had a tiered difficulty level of various spells/effects at each tier. That idea is kind of funny as it would requrie a plethora of spells for no other rasons than to ensure sufficient quantity at X tier.
As I posted in the Responses to GM announcements in the Skills... folders the 3.1 Magic thing... not good. My ability to move multiple Magic skills AND weapons (multiple) is going to become a thing of the past as the need to cast more things becomes prevelant I can only swing a weapon every X seconds of RT. Primary magic using guilds are going to end up all being Moon Mage type combat toons. High magics, crappy weapon ranks across the board.
This really makes me very unhappy.
HUGE ++++ supporting what Maz said. I basically got to find different spells to train while at the same time cast spells that may not train for their effects cus well... thats the whole point of using spell X instead of Y.
The 3.1 concept does not work well for anything but TM bases spells and only if you had a tiered difficulty level of various spells/effects at each tier. That idea is kind of funny as it would requrie a plethora of spells for no other rasons than to ensure sufficient quantity at X tier.
As I posted in the Responses to GM announcements in the Skills... folders the 3.1 Magic thing... not good. My ability to move multiple Magic skills AND weapons (multiple) is going to become a thing of the past as the need to cast more things becomes prevelant I can only swing a weapon every X seconds of RT. Primary magic using guilds are going to end up all being Moon Mage type combat toons. High magics, crappy weapon ranks across the board.
This really makes me very unhappy.
>>That idea is kind of funny as it would requrie a plethora of spells for no other rasons than to ensure sufficient quantity at X tier.
And even IF that was implemented it still = bad idea as the #of spell slots is not infiate and would make having a massive amount of spells to satisfy ALL magic schools at ALL tiers for ALL effects impossible anyway.
Magic 3.1 = needs more work as it was not considered well across the board and the implicatons of turing "OFF" exp on spells based on tier vs ranks.
And even IF that was implemented it still = bad idea as the #of spell slots is not infiate and would make having a massive amount of spells to satisfy ALL magic schools at ALL tiers for ALL effects impossible anyway.
Magic 3.1 = needs more work as it was not considered well across the board and the implicatons of turing "OFF" exp on spells based on tier vs ranks.
>>In magic, though, I'm trying to use specific spells to get specific effects. If my Basic evasion booster stops teaching I can't go cast an Esoteric evasion booster instead.
Agreed. That is kind of obnoxious.
>>TM and Debil
These don't need to be cast at your personal cap really - These are explicitly about the effect (you want to take out your challenging target). More mana is a bonus, but it's not as important.
>>My ability to move multiple Magic skills AND weapons (multiple)
I think it's a mistake to think that there's a goal to optimize the ability to learn as many things as possible in combat.
>>The 3.1 concept does not work well for anything but TM bases spells
The 3.0 model was actually broken in incredible ways. The higher your skills were, the easier it was to lock off of a lower cast.
One important question that comes down is, what is the purpose of experience or training in DR? What does it MEAN to train in DR? The core concept of the game is that you get better at a specific skill by doing things that are challenging to that skill. I think we can all agree that casting the same intro-level evasion booster while you're well into the upper hundreds of skill doesn't really fit that bill at all.
The counterpoint is that folks want the game to be easier to play. I'll submit my view that making a game fun and making a game easy aren't the same thing.
Then, there's the whole 'grind' issue. As noted above, I totally agree that the grind sucks. The ideal scenario is that you are rewarded well for doing the things you would do as an adventurer. Right now, you have to do those things over and over again to get effective training. Combat, interestingly enough, follows the ideal model to a large degree - Ignoring the fact that monsters spawn infinitely, your goal is to kill the monster (conceivably for loot or RP reasons), and you get rewarded handsomely for it.
For magic, that's not as true. This could either be a deficiency of the model OR a deficiency in the availability or continuity of spells. For instance, a spell tree where an introductory evasion buff led to an evasion+reflex buff, which led to an evasion/parry/reflex buff, which led to an evasion/parry/reflex buff that has some manner of warding component - That could be a more applicable spell tree to combining functionality with training.
It's possible that, with the new skills, spells and spell trees need additional revision - We'll probably at least review them sometime soon. However, what exists today is absolutely workable through 1200 ranks. Yes, you might burn a few spell slots on a spell that trains but isn't what you want, and we all agree that that's not desirable. Having a more robust spell list where you're flush with spells to train with for all ranges is a great goal, but what we have today isn't that bad.
>>Magic 3.1 = needs more work as it was not considered well across the board and the implicatons of turing "OFF" exp on spells based on tier vs ranks.
I think there's a conflation here between 'was not well considered' and "you don't like it". Just like you can grow out of certain creatures to hunt, you can grow out of certain spells to cast. That DOES currently imply that you might cast a spell that you don't learn from because of its benefits - Just like you have to swim across Archer's Ford to get to zombie togballers even though it doesn't teach you any swimming anymore. Spells that you learn nothing from still have utility for you, and that's fine.
--
"The ninety and nine are with dreams, content but the hope of the world made new, is the hundredth man who is grimly bent on making those dreams come true." -E.A.P.
Agreed. That is kind of obnoxious.
>>TM and Debil
These don't need to be cast at your personal cap really - These are explicitly about the effect (you want to take out your challenging target). More mana is a bonus, but it's not as important.
>>My ability to move multiple Magic skills AND weapons (multiple)
I think it's a mistake to think that there's a goal to optimize the ability to learn as many things as possible in combat.
>>The 3.1 concept does not work well for anything but TM bases spells
The 3.0 model was actually broken in incredible ways. The higher your skills were, the easier it was to lock off of a lower cast.
One important question that comes down is, what is the purpose of experience or training in DR? What does it MEAN to train in DR? The core concept of the game is that you get better at a specific skill by doing things that are challenging to that skill. I think we can all agree that casting the same intro-level evasion booster while you're well into the upper hundreds of skill doesn't really fit that bill at all.
The counterpoint is that folks want the game to be easier to play. I'll submit my view that making a game fun and making a game easy aren't the same thing.
Then, there's the whole 'grind' issue. As noted above, I totally agree that the grind sucks. The ideal scenario is that you are rewarded well for doing the things you would do as an adventurer. Right now, you have to do those things over and over again to get effective training. Combat, interestingly enough, follows the ideal model to a large degree - Ignoring the fact that monsters spawn infinitely, your goal is to kill the monster (conceivably for loot or RP reasons), and you get rewarded handsomely for it.
For magic, that's not as true. This could either be a deficiency of the model OR a deficiency in the availability or continuity of spells. For instance, a spell tree where an introductory evasion buff led to an evasion+reflex buff, which led to an evasion/parry/reflex buff, which led to an evasion/parry/reflex buff that has some manner of warding component - That could be a more applicable spell tree to combining functionality with training.
It's possible that, with the new skills, spells and spell trees need additional revision - We'll probably at least review them sometime soon. However, what exists today is absolutely workable through 1200 ranks. Yes, you might burn a few spell slots on a spell that trains but isn't what you want, and we all agree that that's not desirable. Having a more robust spell list where you're flush with spells to train with for all ranges is a great goal, but what we have today isn't that bad.
>>Magic 3.1 = needs more work as it was not considered well across the board and the implicatons of turing "OFF" exp on spells based on tier vs ranks.
I think there's a conflation here between 'was not well considered' and "you don't like it". Just like you can grow out of certain creatures to hunt, you can grow out of certain spells to cast. That DOES currently imply that you might cast a spell that you don't learn from because of its benefits - Just like you have to swim across Archer's Ford to get to zombie togballers even though it doesn't teach you any swimming anymore. Spells that you learn nothing from still have utility for you, and that's fine.
--
"The ninety and nine are with dreams, content but the hope of the world made new, is the hundredth man who is grimly bent on making those dreams come true." -E.A.P.
Socharis, I have a suggestion for casting experience and buffs.
Why not let the player dictate at what level they want to cast the spell instead of arbitrarily naming spells intro/basic/advanced/esoteric? For each difficulty level used in conjunction with the spell, provide the appropriate experience? There would need to be variations of the spells as well that will adjust them to provide the appropriate effects which dictate the slot cost. This would allow us players to cast the "useful" spells we would need
For example:
Prep MAPP Intro - Teaches EXP in the Intro Range, Provides the minimal use of the buff. Maybe 5% to Evasion and Defending.
Prep MAPPP Basic - Teaches EXP in the Basic Range, Provides a larger use of the buff. Maybe 10% to Evasion and Defending.
Prep MAPP Advanced - You get the point.
This might be an alternative method for people to continue to use the spells that will functionally help them, while giving everyone a range based on their magic ranks to learn with. To prevent abuse, tier the results of the difficulty you cast, keep the spell slots the same, but only open up the maximum potential based on utilizing Esoteric versions. This will also alleviate the GM team from having to code additional spells for higher level characters just for the sake of being able to learn each spell type with an Esoteric reward range.
Thoughts?
Why not let the player dictate at what level they want to cast the spell instead of arbitrarily naming spells intro/basic/advanced/esoteric? For each difficulty level used in conjunction with the spell, provide the appropriate experience? There would need to be variations of the spells as well that will adjust them to provide the appropriate effects which dictate the slot cost. This would allow us players to cast the "useful" spells we would need
For example:
Prep MAPP Intro - Teaches EXP in the Intro Range, Provides the minimal use of the buff. Maybe 5% to Evasion and Defending.
Prep MAPPP Basic - Teaches EXP in the Basic Range, Provides a larger use of the buff. Maybe 10% to Evasion and Defending.
Prep MAPP Advanced - You get the point.
This might be an alternative method for people to continue to use the spells that will functionally help them, while giving everyone a range based on their magic ranks to learn with. To prevent abuse, tier the results of the difficulty you cast, keep the spell slots the same, but only open up the maximum potential based on utilizing Esoteric versions. This will also alleviate the GM team from having to code additional spells for higher level characters just for the sake of being able to learn each spell type with an Esoteric reward range.
Thoughts?
>>Why not let the player dictate at what level they want to cast the spell
There are a couple problems with this. The first is, it would require editing every spell, which is an enormous effort (300+ spells) that we've already done a LOT of times. I don't think anybody has the energy right now to do it again.
The second issue, which unfortunately makes it a non-starter, is that percentage bonuses cause a linear scaling. In many games that have stepped tiers of abilities, there is a flat bonus that becomes more or less irrelevant to encourage you to use the higher tier. Since we use percentages in most everything we do, a 5% bonus is as good at 100 ranks as it is at 1000 ranks - The difference is felt the same way. Increasing the buff from 5% to 10% would end up making the spell a lot better at higher levels in a way that makes things go really bad at high ranks.
That's why the higher-tier spells have more effects, not stronger effects.
However, you did just spark an idea.... I'll get back to you once I've floated it around a bit.
--
"The ninety and nine are with dreams, content but the hope of the world made new, is the hundredth man who is grimly bent on making those dreams come true." -E.A.P.
There are a couple problems with this. The first is, it would require editing every spell, which is an enormous effort (300+ spells) that we've already done a LOT of times. I don't think anybody has the energy right now to do it again.
The second issue, which unfortunately makes it a non-starter, is that percentage bonuses cause a linear scaling. In many games that have stepped tiers of abilities, there is a flat bonus that becomes more or less irrelevant to encourage you to use the higher tier. Since we use percentages in most everything we do, a 5% bonus is as good at 100 ranks as it is at 1000 ranks - The difference is felt the same way. Increasing the buff from 5% to 10% would end up making the spell a lot better at higher levels in a way that makes things go really bad at high ranks.
That's why the higher-tier spells have more effects, not stronger effects.
However, you did just spark an idea.... I'll get back to you once I've floated it around a bit.
--
"The ninety and nine are with dreams, content but the hope of the world made new, is the hundredth man who is grimly bent on making those dreams come true." -E.A.P.
>>For instance, a spell tree where an introductory evasion buff led to an evasion+reflex buff, which led to an evasion/parry/reflex buff, which led to an evasion/parry/reflex buff that has some manner of warding component - That could be a more applicable spell tree to combining functionality with training.
You sir are talking a LOT of sense with this. Yes the ideal concept that is where it would go. The current concept how many guilds/magic spell trees have that all the way trhough it? 1 or none? Yet we are going trough with the 3.1 concept of nerfing EXP for lower end spells.
I have a MM with 1400 in magics as it is I am barely eaking out ranks for anything but Attunement, PM and Arcana after the 1k mark. Utility, Debilitation, Augmentation, Warding... it is a C R A W L using what I have available at CAP. Never mind when you turn off exp from lower end spells and I have no higher end spells available that I want to cast up in the higher tier spell tree.
You sir are talking a LOT of sense with this. Yes the ideal concept that is where it would go. The current concept how many guilds/magic spell trees have that all the way trhough it? 1 or none? Yet we are going trough with the 3.1 concept of nerfing EXP for lower end spells.
I have a MM with 1400 in magics as it is I am barely eaking out ranks for anything but Attunement, PM and Arcana after the 1k mark. Utility, Debilitation, Augmentation, Warding... it is a C R A W L using what I have available at CAP. Never mind when you turn off exp from lower end spells and I have no higher end spells available that I want to cast up in the higher tier spell tree.
>I'll submit my view that making a game fun and making a game easy aren't the same thing.
Yeah, but it's also the same way on the flipside - What you view as difficult or complicated may not be what others see as "fun", either. The odds people agree on what is 'fun' is almost nonexistent, unfortunately. :<
Simple/Easy CAN = Fun, but not always
Complex/Hard CAN = Fun, but not always
...In the case of 3.1, a lot of it seems less complex and more tedious. I'm pretty proud of my combats but it's just a gigantic bummer to have to choose two hunting areas for combats/magic (and none of the workable ones are even in the same province). The Research thing is a neat idea, but...as much as I hate to say it, it sounds like a glorified band-aid to cover the wounds Magic 3.1 would make, rather than finding a way to make it work.
On top of that (just an example), if the timer were 300s to lock one magic type, people could have every single magic type on a constant learnrate with pretty much no effort. It would be a pretty colossal backstep from the efforts of fixing cyclic exp, really.
>Also I wonder if I could convince Armifer to give a 1% bonus to people wearing spectacles. Just 'cause.
So I got this Saemaus Rose...
Yeah, but it's also the same way on the flipside - What you view as difficult or complicated may not be what others see as "fun", either. The odds people agree on what is 'fun' is almost nonexistent, unfortunately. :<
Simple/Easy CAN = Fun, but not always
Complex/Hard CAN = Fun, but not always
...In the case of 3.1, a lot of it seems less complex and more tedious. I'm pretty proud of my combats but it's just a gigantic bummer to have to choose two hunting areas for combats/magic (and none of the workable ones are even in the same province). The Research thing is a neat idea, but...as much as I hate to say it, it sounds like a glorified band-aid to cover the wounds Magic 3.1 would make, rather than finding a way to make it work.
On top of that (just an example), if the timer were 300s to lock one magic type, people could have every single magic type on a constant learnrate with pretty much no effort. It would be a pretty colossal backstep from the efforts of fixing cyclic exp, really.
>Also I wonder if I could convince Armifer to give a 1% bonus to people wearing spectacles. Just 'cause.
So I got this Saemaus Rose...
>>What you view as difficult or complicated may not be what others see as "fun", either.
Yeah, but it's also the same way on the flipside - I totally agree. Bartle's got a great writeup about some of the fundamentals of what people get out of playing games, and there's a TON of other literature out there too.
What we have in 3.0 caters exclusively to people who want things as easy as possible. Training magic requires almost no effort - You can train your magics well into the thousands with a low-cast ES. In fact, the higher your skill gets, the EASIER it is to train with a low-level spell. It's actually absurdly broken in a lot of ways under the hood, and while it's nice to just be able to not have to think about what you have to do in order to gain ranks, that's not a very compelling game.
>>it's just a gigantic bummer to have to choose two hunting areas for combats/magic
Forgive my snark, but welcome to the life of a warrior mage. It's more prevalent in 3.1, but the fact that you're kind of screwed if your skills aren't pretty close together is only new for some guilds - Others have been living with it for a log time, which sucks. At high levels, there are some serious gaps that make it worse - We're working on addressing that right now (see: Melete's creatures, and a couple unannounced things that you'll hear about in the next couple days).
And, to be fair, the hunting area problem only applies if you want to train TM or Debil. The rest can be trained from the comfort of your own home.
>>The Research thing is a neat idea, but...as much as I hate to say it, it sounds like a glorified band-aid to cover the wounds Magic 3.1 would make, rather than finding a way to make it work.
If you're unhappy with the idea that you need to cast challenging spells to train your magic skills, I don't think we're ever going to see eye to eye. Magic 3.1 is going to change up the way people train magics from something that took little effort or care into something a bit more aligned with other important systems, especially since the magic skills are incredibly important to how effective you are as an adventurer.
If anything, RESEARCH is a gesture to allow people who WANT to pay less attention to the spell progression to continue doing so. The Symbioses also help with that, because they let you scale a low-level spell up to a higher-level spell and continue using it to train.
--
"The ninety and nine are with dreams, content but the hope of the world made new, is the hundredth man who is grimly bent on making those dreams come true." -E.A.P.
Yeah, but it's also the same way on the flipside - I totally agree. Bartle's got a great writeup about some of the fundamentals of what people get out of playing games, and there's a TON of other literature out there too.
What we have in 3.0 caters exclusively to people who want things as easy as possible. Training magic requires almost no effort - You can train your magics well into the thousands with a low-cast ES. In fact, the higher your skill gets, the EASIER it is to train with a low-level spell. It's actually absurdly broken in a lot of ways under the hood, and while it's nice to just be able to not have to think about what you have to do in order to gain ranks, that's not a very compelling game.
>>it's just a gigantic bummer to have to choose two hunting areas for combats/magic
Forgive my snark, but welcome to the life of a warrior mage. It's more prevalent in 3.1, but the fact that you're kind of screwed if your skills aren't pretty close together is only new for some guilds - Others have been living with it for a log time, which sucks. At high levels, there are some serious gaps that make it worse - We're working on addressing that right now (see: Melete's creatures, and a couple unannounced things that you'll hear about in the next couple days).
And, to be fair, the hunting area problem only applies if you want to train TM or Debil. The rest can be trained from the comfort of your own home.
>>The Research thing is a neat idea, but...as much as I hate to say it, it sounds like a glorified band-aid to cover the wounds Magic 3.1 would make, rather than finding a way to make it work.
If you're unhappy with the idea that you need to cast challenging spells to train your magic skills, I don't think we're ever going to see eye to eye. Magic 3.1 is going to change up the way people train magics from something that took little effort or care into something a bit more aligned with other important systems, especially since the magic skills are incredibly important to how effective you are as an adventurer.
If anything, RESEARCH is a gesture to allow people who WANT to pay less attention to the spell progression to continue doing so. The Symbioses also help with that, because they let you scale a low-level spell up to a higher-level spell and continue using it to train.
--
"The ninety and nine are with dreams, content but the hope of the world made new, is the hundredth man who is grimly bent on making those dreams come true." -E.A.P.
>Forgive my snark, but welcome to the life of a warrior mage. It's more prevalent in 3.1, but the fact that you're kind of screwed if your skills aren't pretty close together is only new for some guilds - Others have been living with it for a log time, which sucks. At high levels, there are some serious gaps that make it worse - We're working on addressing that right now (see: Melete's creatures, and a couple unannounced things that you'll hear about in the next couple days).
>And, to be fair, the hunting area problem only applies if you want to train TM or Debil. The rest can be trained from the comfort of your own home.
I'm a Cleric, so I know all too well the challenges of training a survival/armor tert. I also pride myself in keeping my defenses very well above the average, and I still struggle with creatures that teach everything. Contrarily, creatures that teach me "poorly" still landed a slurry of notably dangerous hits on me), when going by the appraisal, I was underhunting to begin with. I'm a bit disheartened that your response would be telling a mage (or ANY guild) to intentionally ignore their primaries... :<
>If you're unhappy with the idea that you need to cast challenging spells to train your magic skills, I don't think we're ever going to see eye to eye. Magic 3.1 is going to change up the way people train magics from something that took little effort or care into something a bit more aligned with other important systems, especially since the magic skills are incredibly important to how effective you are as an adventurer.
That's kind of jabbing at one thing while intentionally avoiding the entire other thing I said. I'm sorry if I said something to anger you, but really now, is there a need for all that?
I'm simply saying RESEARCH undoes (and then some) what the cyclic fix is trying to rid of. Consider how long it takes for a skill to drain...if someone can mindlock a magic in 5 minutes by doing nothing, and it takes (according to wiki) 40 minutes at best for a primary to completely drain, it means they could keep 8 magics on a constant learnrate by sitting in town. A secondary/tertiary could easily keep every magic locked. Even with a additional 5min cooldown after every study, primaries would be able to keep at least four magics moving, which is the ballpark of what 3.0 cyclics did for most guilds to begin with. The 3.1 stuff seems like an extensive project, I'd hate to see it all undone by an idea what wasn't thoroughly thought over.
Most of the magic stuff I'm indifferent to. I already cast spells at cap when rebuffing to get the most I can out of it. I'm actually quite happy at the idea of (S/s)orcery being more looked into [although I'd love for there to be more ways for Backlash chance to be reduced. If it does, yay, if it doesn't, oh well.] - I said combat was a bummer but I also know things are in TEST for a reason. Such as...to test things! I know that the more there is a shared opinion on something the more likely it is to be heard, and I trust the staff to look into things in the case it is true and not just a white noise of wailing nerds.
Gimme back my rose, you're a bully.
>And, to be fair, the hunting area problem only applies if you want to train TM or Debil. The rest can be trained from the comfort of your own home.
I'm a Cleric, so I know all too well the challenges of training a survival/armor tert. I also pride myself in keeping my defenses very well above the average, and I still struggle with creatures that teach everything. Contrarily, creatures that teach me "poorly" still landed a slurry of notably dangerous hits on me), when going by the appraisal, I was underhunting to begin with. I'm a bit disheartened that your response would be telling a mage (or ANY guild) to intentionally ignore their primaries... :<
>If you're unhappy with the idea that you need to cast challenging spells to train your magic skills, I don't think we're ever going to see eye to eye. Magic 3.1 is going to change up the way people train magics from something that took little effort or care into something a bit more aligned with other important systems, especially since the magic skills are incredibly important to how effective you are as an adventurer.
That's kind of jabbing at one thing while intentionally avoiding the entire other thing I said. I'm sorry if I said something to anger you, but really now, is there a need for all that?
I'm simply saying RESEARCH undoes (and then some) what the cyclic fix is trying to rid of. Consider how long it takes for a skill to drain...if someone can mindlock a magic in 5 minutes by doing nothing, and it takes (according to wiki) 40 minutes at best for a primary to completely drain, it means they could keep 8 magics on a constant learnrate by sitting in town. A secondary/tertiary could easily keep every magic locked. Even with a additional 5min cooldown after every study, primaries would be able to keep at least four magics moving, which is the ballpark of what 3.0 cyclics did for most guilds to begin with. The 3.1 stuff seems like an extensive project, I'd hate to see it all undone by an idea what wasn't thoroughly thought over.
Most of the magic stuff I'm indifferent to. I already cast spells at cap when rebuffing to get the most I can out of it. I'm actually quite happy at the idea of (S/s)orcery being more looked into [although I'd love for there to be more ways for Backlash chance to be reduced. If it does, yay, if it doesn't, oh well.] - I said combat was a bummer but I also know things are in TEST for a reason. Such as...to test things! I know that the more there is a shared opinion on something the more likely it is to be heard, and I trust the staff to look into things in the case it is true and not just a white noise of wailing nerds.
Gimme back my rose, you're a bully.
>>I'm a bit disheartened that your response would be telling a mage (or ANY guild) to intentionally ignore their primaries...
It's not so much telling you to ignore your primaries as gesturing toward a larger problem we have where nearly every guild eventually finds themselves advancing up the hunting ladder at a tertiary rate. As a Cleric I'm sure you've had to straddle two critters a few times to get your TM and your weapons moving (unless you've taken care to keep them balanced), which was further hindered in the survivability range by your evasion.
>>if someone can mindlock a magic in 5 minutes by doing nothing
So to be clear, research projects will not only take 5 minutes. 5 minutes was the maximum RT you could apply to yourself suggested in the original post by Armifer, but by no means did we plan to have the 5 minutes be the time to complete a project. That, I agree, would be a huge step backwards.
In general, RESEARCH will be slower than normal spellcasting for experience, when the spellcasting is being done at optimal difficulties.
--
"The ninety and nine are with dreams, content but the hope of the world made new, is the hundredth man who is grimly bent on making those dreams come true." -E.A.P.
It's not so much telling you to ignore your primaries as gesturing toward a larger problem we have where nearly every guild eventually finds themselves advancing up the hunting ladder at a tertiary rate. As a Cleric I'm sure you've had to straddle two critters a few times to get your TM and your weapons moving (unless you've taken care to keep them balanced), which was further hindered in the survivability range by your evasion.
>>if someone can mindlock a magic in 5 minutes by doing nothing
So to be clear, research projects will not only take 5 minutes. 5 minutes was the maximum RT you could apply to yourself suggested in the original post by Armifer, but by no means did we plan to have the 5 minutes be the time to complete a project. That, I agree, would be a huge step backwards.
In general, RESEARCH will be slower than normal spellcasting for experience, when the spellcasting is being done at optimal difficulties.
--
"The ninety and nine are with dreams, content but the hope of the world made new, is the hundredth man who is grimly bent on making those dreams come true." -E.A.P.
>It's not so much telling you to ignore your primaries as gesturing toward a larger problem we have where nearly every guild eventually finds themselves advancing up the hunting ladder at a tertiary rate. As a Cleric I'm sure you've had to straddle two critters a few times to get your TM and your weapons moving (unless you've taken care to keep them balanced), which was further hindered in the survivability range by your evasion.
That's not the case, as a Cleric player In 2.0 and 3.0 I've always been able to learn both magic (TM/Debilitation) and tertiary skills using the same creature by leveraging debilitation and buffs to hunt higher on the creature ladder. Once magics began to taper off, I could transition into a more difficult area to continue working both in tandem. As armor/survival tertiary, buffs and debilitations have been paramount to allow me to survive against creatures that could effectively move my magic and weapons, while also allowing me to continue to train tertiary skills which for obvious reasons are lower.
Moving hunting grounds in 3.1 changes this methodology, and while I can still manage to survive (albeit taking more wounds) and be able to learn Magic, I find some of my other tertiary skills aren't going to sustain the ranks to grow with my character. One of the glaring skills I've picked up on right away is Stealth. In 3.1 I've had to jump a couple creatures to be able to continue to work my primary skills, but with this comes the inability to learn Stealth as it's a few hundred ranks below my primaries, but it's even with evasion and shield.
I wish an easy answer were to move to a different hunting area to practice on a lesser creature, but this isn't a sustainable solution since you won't always have a marginally smaller creature to hide on in the area you learn your primary skills at.
Other skills seem to teach on failure but at a reduced rate, would it be possible for more skills to be added to this as well? I'm hoping I don't have to completely scrap learning Stealth just because of skillset placement.
That's not the case, as a Cleric player In 2.0 and 3.0 I've always been able to learn both magic (TM/Debilitation) and tertiary skills using the same creature by leveraging debilitation and buffs to hunt higher on the creature ladder. Once magics began to taper off, I could transition into a more difficult area to continue working both in tandem. As armor/survival tertiary, buffs and debilitations have been paramount to allow me to survive against creatures that could effectively move my magic and weapons, while also allowing me to continue to train tertiary skills which for obvious reasons are lower.
Moving hunting grounds in 3.1 changes this methodology, and while I can still manage to survive (albeit taking more wounds) and be able to learn Magic, I find some of my other tertiary skills aren't going to sustain the ranks to grow with my character. One of the glaring skills I've picked up on right away is Stealth. In 3.1 I've had to jump a couple creatures to be able to continue to work my primary skills, but with this comes the inability to learn Stealth as it's a few hundred ranks below my primaries, but it's even with evasion and shield.
I wish an easy answer were to move to a different hunting area to practice on a lesser creature, but this isn't a sustainable solution since you won't always have a marginally smaller creature to hide on in the area you learn your primary skills at.
Other skills seem to teach on failure but at a reduced rate, would it be possible for more skills to be added to this as well? I'm hoping I don't have to completely scrap learning Stealth just because of skillset placement.
>Other skills seem to teach on failure but at a reduced rate, would it be possible for more skills to be added to this as well? I'm hoping I don't have to completely scrap learning Stealth just because of skillset placement.
As a Survival Prime I have long ago given up on prime skills learning in combat that teaches terts.
the big picture is the skill sets difference was not a huge perceived problem in 1996. Nobody was seeing a skill cap going so high. Now the difference is here in the present and the only way to truely combat it is ...
A) hunt at your tert level till they catch up.
B) travel hunt to fill both sets.
I have been doing A. for a long time and not feeling the hit to bad. But I also train enough secondaries that they are spread out so far there advance the same rate as my terts.
Deadly force, is the force which a person uses, causing—or that a person knows, or should know, would create a substantial risk of causing—death or serious bodily harm. Deadly Force is justified only under conditions of extreme necessity as a last resort,
As a Survival Prime I have long ago given up on prime skills learning in combat that teaches terts.
the big picture is the skill sets difference was not a huge perceived problem in 1996. Nobody was seeing a skill cap going so high. Now the difference is here in the present and the only way to truely combat it is ...
A) hunt at your tert level till they catch up.
B) travel hunt to fill both sets.
I have been doing A. for a long time and not feeling the hit to bad. But I also train enough secondaries that they are spread out so far there advance the same rate as my terts.
Deadly force, is the force which a person uses, causing—or that a person knows, or should know, would create a substantial risk of causing—death or serious bodily harm. Deadly Force is justified only under conditions of extreme necessity as a last resort,
>>It's not so much telling you to ignore your primaries as gesturing toward a larger problem we have where nearly every guild eventually finds themselves advancing up the hunting ladder at a tertiary rate. As a Cleric I'm sure you've had to straddle two critters a few times to get your TM and your weapons moving (unless you've taken care to keep them balanced), which was further hindered in the survivability range by your evasion.
FWIW, I've never had to do this on any character I've trained since ~2008 or earlier, whenever I started learning to script and train halfway decently. I can't vouch for War Mages or Clerics (as have been referenced), but Bards, Thieves, Paladins, Barbarians, Rangers, and Moon Mages I've always been able to progress along the creature ladders while keeping primary through tertiary skills moving comfortably. 3.1 test server is the first time I've encountered an exception to this rule.
CLERIXHAX's post on the matter is spot on.
>befriend clear all
You are now friendless.
FWIW, I've never had to do this on any character I've trained since ~2008 or earlier, whenever I started learning to script and train halfway decently. I can't vouch for War Mages or Clerics (as have been referenced), but Bards, Thieves, Paladins, Barbarians, Rangers, and Moon Mages I've always been able to progress along the creature ladders while keeping primary through tertiary skills moving comfortably. 3.1 test server is the first time I've encountered an exception to this rule.
CLERIXHAX's post on the matter is spot on.
>befriend clear all
You are now friendless.
<<It's not so much telling you to ignore your primaries as gesturing toward a larger problem we have where nearly every guild eventually finds themselves advancing up the hunting ladder at a tertiary rate.
That has essentially been a problem for the entire existence of Dragonrealms.
Sure you can blow ahead for a time, but you eventually become unbalanced and have to 'back train', which stinks so much. The only way around it is to train 5 or 6 weapons (even if you don't want to) while you wait for your defenses to catch up. As a warrior mage, nearly ALL my defenses are tert. It stinks, big time.
--
In memory of Lisa/Martee. Passed 6/17/2013. A friend. A sister.
That has essentially been a problem for the entire existence of Dragonrealms.
Sure you can blow ahead for a time, but you eventually become unbalanced and have to 'back train', which stinks so much. The only way around it is to train 5 or 6 weapons (even if you don't want to) while you wait for your defenses to catch up. As a warrior mage, nearly ALL my defenses are tert. It stinks, big time.
--
In memory of Lisa/Martee. Passed 6/17/2013. A friend. A sister.
>That has essentially been a problem for the entire existence of Dragonrealms.
I'd respectfully disagree with this statement, having played multiple characters at multiple points in my DR history this has never been an issue. There's certain caveats which dictate progression like utilizing disarm/lockpicking as a circle requirement for certain guilds or player choices. However; pre 3.1, progression has never been held back due to an inability to work both primary and tertiary skills at the same time. There have been huge experience ranges for a vast majority of the creatures in this game with a lot of overlap which made transitioning into different hunting grounds extremely easy. Having to "ignore" primary skills and advance solely on being able to practice tertiary skills is mostly driven from a desire to want to stay in certain areas or hunt certain creatures, not by force.
I'd respectfully disagree with this statement, having played multiple characters at multiple points in my DR history this has never been an issue. There's certain caveats which dictate progression like utilizing disarm/lockpicking as a circle requirement for certain guilds or player choices. However; pre 3.1, progression has never been held back due to an inability to work both primary and tertiary skills at the same time. There have been huge experience ranges for a vast majority of the creatures in this game with a lot of overlap which made transitioning into different hunting grounds extremely easy. Having to "ignore" primary skills and advance solely on being able to practice tertiary skills is mostly driven from a desire to want to stay in certain areas or hunt certain creatures, not by force.
I had to train to terts as a thief and as a MM in 2.0, until about the 300 rank range. At around bristleback peccs or so (or gryphons later), the range of teaching opened up enough that I could train everything at once from then on. Before that, I had to forgo TM for terts. I would have had to forgo stealth for terts as a thief too, but they had snipe melee and ambush right eye hax for so long, I never had to deal it much. TV and MB nerve damage were very helpful as a MM (and are again now, since I need them for cabalists).
>I'd respectfully disagree with this statement, having played multiple characters at multiple points in my DR history this has never been an issue.
I'm surprised to hear this, as truthfully, I find this to be absolutely something that happens in DR. Someone mentioned training multiple weapons to let defenses catch up, which as always seemed the best solution. I've played Warrior Mages, Clerics, Empaths, Moon Mages, Barbarians, Necromancers, and Paladins now, and each guilds tertiaries tend to lag and require some backtraining. I imagine the gaps get larger the higher you circle. Say, for example, that Aftermath was training stealth; would you anticipate through your training, being able to train stealth on the same critters that train TM?
I'm surprised to hear this, as truthfully, I find this to be absolutely something that happens in DR. Someone mentioned training multiple weapons to let defenses catch up, which as always seemed the best solution. I've played Warrior Mages, Clerics, Empaths, Moon Mages, Barbarians, Necromancers, and Paladins now, and each guilds tertiaries tend to lag and require some backtraining. I imagine the gaps get larger the higher you circle. Say, for example, that Aftermath was training stealth; would you anticipate through your training, being able to train stealth on the same critters that train TM?
>I'm surprised to hear this, as truthfully, I find this to be absolutely something that happens in DR. Someone mentioned training multiple weapons to let defenses catch up, which as always seemed the best solution. I've played Warrior Mages, Clerics, Empaths, Moon Mages, Barbarians, Necromancers, and Paladins now, and each guilds tertiaries tend to lag and require some backtraining. I imagine the gaps get larger the higher you circle.
There's a big overlap from low to mid level and a large experience range, that you can comfortably progress from creature to creature without having to milk a previous creature for tertiary skills when you can move onto something slightly harder once you reach the soft cap range. The higher you go, the larger those experience ranges increase, it just gets more prevalent the further you get in creature progression.
>Say, for example, that Aftermath was training stealth; would you anticipate through your training, being able to train stealth on the same critters that train TM?
If we're talking about the current iteration of the game, Yes that's how I've been circling from the character gen. If we're talking about 3.1 in it's current state, then No. With the tightening of the experience reigns and the necessity to move to more challenging creatures on the Test server, I'm finding I have to make a choice on either neglecting certain tertiary skills or magic. I haven't delved too deep on workarounds yet, like a shadows scroll. The direction seems to be heading towards pick a few, not all (which is understandable.) to slow down the rate that players are achieving experience.
There's a big overlap from low to mid level and a large experience range, that you can comfortably progress from creature to creature without having to milk a previous creature for tertiary skills when you can move onto something slightly harder once you reach the soft cap range. The higher you go, the larger those experience ranges increase, it just gets more prevalent the further you get in creature progression.
>Say, for example, that Aftermath was training stealth; would you anticipate through your training, being able to train stealth on the same critters that train TM?
If we're talking about the current iteration of the game, Yes that's how I've been circling from the character gen. If we're talking about 3.1 in it's current state, then No. With the tightening of the experience reigns and the necessity to move to more challenging creatures on the Test server, I'm finding I have to make a choice on either neglecting certain tertiary skills or magic. I haven't delved too deep on workarounds yet, like a shadows scroll. The direction seems to be heading towards pick a few, not all (which is understandable.) to slow down the rate that players are achieving experience.
>If we're talking about the current iteration of the game, Yes that's how I've been circling from the character gen. If we're talking about 3.1 in it's current state, then No. With the tightening of the experience reigns and the necessity to move to more challenging creatures on the Test server, I'm finding I have to make a choice on either neglecting certain tertiary skills or magic. I haven't delved too deep on workarounds yet, like a shadows scroll. The direction seems to be heading towards pick a few, not all (which is understandable.) to slow down the rate that players are achieving experience.
also keep in mind after any major change there is always a period of difference before the entire system settles out. Take the small amount of time to do a minor back train and then you will be more in line with the new changes.
I for one am back training currently to be ready when it goes live and transition should be fairly smooth.
Deadly force, is the force which a person uses, causing—or that a person knows, or should know, would create a substantial risk of causing—death or serious bodily harm. Deadly Force is justified only under conditions of extreme necessity as a last resort,
also keep in mind after any major change there is always a period of difference before the entire system settles out. Take the small amount of time to do a minor back train and then you will be more in line with the new changes.
I for one am back training currently to be ready when it goes live and transition should be fairly smooth.
Deadly force, is the force which a person uses, causing—or that a person knows, or should know, would create a substantial risk of causing—death or serious bodily harm. Deadly Force is justified only under conditions of extreme necessity as a last resort,
>There's a big overlap from low to mid level and a large experience range, that you can comfortably progress from creature to creature without having to milk a previous creature for tertiary skills when you can move onto something slightly harder once you reach the soft cap range. The higher you go, the larger those experience ranges increase, it just gets more prevalent the further you get in creature progression.
When my Necromancer stopped learning Evasion and Stealth on middle gryphons, weapons hadn't caught up. When my Moon Mage stopped being able to train TM on lower gryphons, he couldn't handle middle gryphons with his weapons/defenses. That pattern has been pretty similar for almost all my characters, although I admittedly didn't train many weapons until pretty recently, which probably explains part of that for at least the Cleric/Warmie/Paladin. I wager the higher you find yourself, the wider the critter ranges, and the more potent the self-buffing. Shrug; I'll have to check more on test.
When my Necromancer stopped learning Evasion and Stealth on middle gryphons, weapons hadn't caught up. When my Moon Mage stopped being able to train TM on lower gryphons, he couldn't handle middle gryphons with his weapons/defenses. That pattern has been pretty similar for almost all my characters, although I admittedly didn't train many weapons until pretty recently, which probably explains part of that for at least the Cleric/Warmie/Paladin. I wager the higher you find yourself, the wider the critter ranges, and the more potent the self-buffing. Shrug; I'll have to check more on test.
>>Not having to deal with a gap between critters
The myriad perspectives in response to this have been very interesting.
I think one reason the gap is felt more keenly at high levels in 3.1 is that there are so many gaps in hunting areas, too. We need to fill those gaps in some serious ways.
--
"The ninety and nine are with dreams, content but the hope of the world made new, is the hundredth man who is grimly bent on making those dreams come true." -E.A.P.
The myriad perspectives in response to this have been very interesting.
I think one reason the gap is felt more keenly at high levels in 3.1 is that there are so many gaps in hunting areas, too. We need to fill those gaps in some serious ways.
--
"The ninety and nine are with dreams, content but the hope of the world made new, is the hundredth man who is grimly bent on making those dreams come true." -E.A.P.
I've never had any issues with having to backtrain and I've trained 4 characters to the 100-130 range. It can be a pain but its doable by jacking agil/reflex, employing disablers and staying in an area till the absolute hardcap. Some people might consider this underhunting but if my primes are over 2/34 and my terts are chugging along nicely I'm happy. Thats not to say I don't jump into a higher hunting area if one is near to lock occasionally before logoff. Plus itz not that big of a deal to hop between a few places in game like zombies and apes in boar clan since zombies are so easy to hit while apes parry quite well.
It seems like 3.1 might be a different can of worms, especially going into intercessors and cabalists but I think some new options are slated for those rangers but who's to say they wont be harder.
It seems like 3.1 might be a different can of worms, especially going into intercessors and cabalists but I think some new options are slated for those rangers but who's to say they wont be harder.
>When my Necromancer stopped learning Evasion and Stealth on middle gryphons, weapons hadn't caught up. When my Moon Mage stopped being able to train TM on lower gryphons, he couldn't handle middle gryphons with his weapons/defenses. That pattern has been pretty similar for almost all my characters, although I admittedly didn't train many weapons until pretty recently, which probably explains part of that for at least the Cleric/Warmie/Paladin. I wager the higher you find yourself, the wider the critter ranges, and the more potent the self-buffing. Shrug; I'll have to check more on test
That's the thing about the breadth of mid level creatures, there's better overlap than following gryphons in a linear fashion, you're not limited to just that. I opted to go caracals to moruryn and ratha celps as the overlap made it more desirable.
That's the thing about the breadth of mid level creatures, there's better overlap than following gryphons in a linear fashion, you're not limited to just that. I opted to go caracals to moruryn and ratha celps as the overlap made it more desirable.
>>I think something needs to change with the recast over and over methodology for learning magic skills.
>>I agree, but what would you suggest as an alternative? Giving people faster locking would just catapult them to the end-game faster, which we all know isn't very well-fleshed-out right now.
This is the point of view of the GMs that baffles me more than any other. Every game has an 'end-game', and let's be honest - not a single game gets it right. Every single game has something about endgame we would change.
DR's end-game has already been reached by several people. There's a handful in cabalists/drakes. This is no different than assassins previously, and dillos prior to that. Dragonrealms end-game is a proverbial Pandora's Box. It's out already, people are using it. How will a few more being there hurt? Sure, some people will complain about crowded hunting grounds. So is gryphons and no one is complaining that.
In my opinion, the problem with this mind set is that it only hurts casual players.
If you look at the end-game people, or the people advancing there at too rapid a pace - they're not doing that because of how long it takes to mind lock a skill. They're doing that because they're staying logged in 12+ hours a day, with genie scripts optimized to the fraction of a second to eek out every single bit of learning possible. No matter what is done to XP, they will keep doing this. Look at the current change to cyclics - sure the GMs will put them on a timer... how long until the number crunchers discover the curve? It's just another line of code to add to the genie script and it gets automatically recast. Make cyclics not teach at all and recasting ad nauseum is the way to go? Not a problem, genie can handle that too.
No matter how you try to avoid faster locking, the only people affected by it are the casual ones, who could use some help getting to the fun stuff. And trust me, magic 3.0 as a noob is not fun.
>>I agree, but what would you suggest as an alternative? Giving people faster locking would just catapult them to the end-game faster, which we all know isn't very well-fleshed-out right now.
This is the point of view of the GMs that baffles me more than any other. Every game has an 'end-game', and let's be honest - not a single game gets it right. Every single game has something about endgame we would change.
DR's end-game has already been reached by several people. There's a handful in cabalists/drakes. This is no different than assassins previously, and dillos prior to that. Dragonrealms end-game is a proverbial Pandora's Box. It's out already, people are using it. How will a few more being there hurt? Sure, some people will complain about crowded hunting grounds. So is gryphons and no one is complaining that.
In my opinion, the problem with this mind set is that it only hurts casual players.
If you look at the end-game people, or the people advancing there at too rapid a pace - they're not doing that because of how long it takes to mind lock a skill. They're doing that because they're staying logged in 12+ hours a day, with genie scripts optimized to the fraction of a second to eek out every single bit of learning possible. No matter what is done to XP, they will keep doing this. Look at the current change to cyclics - sure the GMs will put them on a timer... how long until the number crunchers discover the curve? It's just another line of code to add to the genie script and it gets automatically recast. Make cyclics not teach at all and recasting ad nauseum is the way to go? Not a problem, genie can handle that too.
No matter how you try to avoid faster locking, the only people affected by it are the casual ones, who could use some help getting to the fun stuff. And trust me, magic 3.0 as a noob is not fun.
Casual players aren't going to fall apart in the magic game just because magic is a little harder than "cast once and forget it."
There's a middle ground between "so easy it's a joke" and "so hard you can't possibly be competitive without genie expertise." I think that's what they're working on.
There's a middle ground between "so easy it's a joke" and "so hard you can't possibly be competitive without genie expertise." I think that's what they're working on.
>>There's a middle ground between "so easy it's a joke" and "so hard you can't possibly be competitive without genie expertise." I think that's what they're working on.
I get that, and for the most part I trust the GMs to find a good middle ground. We've got a great bunch with unprecedented transparency and I really enjoy how open and honest they are with these discussions nowadays.
I've just seen the 'people are learning too fast' reasoning far too many times over the years, and it seems the same people just tweak scripts and keep on trucking. They're going to stay mind locked whatever changes the GMs make, so I don't see how punishing the little guy helps. (generally speaking...I understand the current cyclic change)
I get that, and for the most part I trust the GMs to find a good middle ground. We've got a great bunch with unprecedented transparency and I really enjoy how open and honest they are with these discussions nowadays.
I've just seen the 'people are learning too fast' reasoning far too many times over the years, and it seems the same people just tweak scripts and keep on trucking. They're going to stay mind locked whatever changes the GMs make, so I don't see how punishing the little guy helps. (generally speaking...I understand the current cyclic change)
