Previous Thread
Expand All
Collapse All
Ignore Author
Reply
So, I just went and picked up a tabla.
With 1550 Performance, I'm unable to play even off-key scales (the least difficult play style) without getting the "You fumble slightly" messaging. Are they intended to be THAT difficult? For reference, with bagpipes (which I believe are the next most difficult instrument) I get the "You effortlessly begin" messaging with a masterful concerto, the most difficult play style. Even with a capped ECRY and a PRACTICE bonus, I'm still only able to get "You begin an off-key ruff on your silver tabla," with off-key scales.
Not complaining, just curious if they were meant to be that much more difficult. I don't think it would even be possible to play a concerto with 1750 ranks, buffed!
GENT
Just so no one panics, this is only live in TF at the moment.
>With 1550 Performance, I'm unable to play even off-key scales (the least difficult play style) without getting the "You fumble slightly" messaging. Are they intended to be THAT difficult? For reference, with bagpipes (which I believe are the next most difficult instrument) I get the "You effortlessly begin" messaging with a masterful concerto, the most difficult play style. Even with a capped ECRY and a PRACTICE bonus, I'm still only able to get "You begin an off-key ruff on your silver tabla," with off-key scales.
>Not complaining, just curious if they were meant to be that much more difficult. I don't think it would even be possible to play a concerto with 1750 ranks, buffed!
They are meant to be difficult. With the way the system works (possibly it uses voodoo, I don't know for sure) the trade off for being able to learn at higher ranks is never being able to play it well. I did some extensive testing myself, but the reason I threw it out to you guys in TF is that I need more practical testing to see if it is doable, learnable and feels comfortable from a player standpoint. I can sit there and test it all I want before release, but when it comes right down to it, I'm not playing as you guys would.
The jump in difficulty versus learning has to be extremely higher (than bagpipes as you noticed) in order for you guys to actually LEARN something at those higher ranks. If I take it down too much more, you aren't going to be learning as efficiently (at least, as efficiently as I hope you're learning now, still would like some feedback on that. You can email me directly with that if you'd like.)
Voodoo. Really.
~Evike
>With 1550 Performance, I'm unable to play even off-key scales (the least difficult play style) without getting the "You fumble slightly" messaging. Are they intended to be THAT difficult? For reference, with bagpipes (which I believe are the next most difficult instrument) I get the "You effortlessly begin" messaging with a masterful concerto, the most difficult play style. Even with a capped ECRY and a PRACTICE bonus, I'm still only able to get "You begin an off-key ruff on your silver tabla," with off-key scales.
>Not complaining, just curious if they were meant to be that much more difficult. I don't think it would even be possible to play a concerto with 1750 ranks, buffed!
They are meant to be difficult. With the way the system works (possibly it uses voodoo, I don't know for sure) the trade off for being able to learn at higher ranks is never being able to play it well. I did some extensive testing myself, but the reason I threw it out to you guys in TF is that I need more practical testing to see if it is doable, learnable and feels comfortable from a player standpoint. I can sit there and test it all I want before release, but when it comes right down to it, I'm not playing as you guys would.
The jump in difficulty versus learning has to be extremely higher (than bagpipes as you noticed) in order for you guys to actually LEARN something at those higher ranks. If I take it down too much more, you aren't going to be learning as efficiently (at least, as efficiently as I hope you're learning now, still would like some feedback on that. You can email me directly with that if you'd like.)
Voodoo. Really.
~Evike
So the order is 1 ) Spell contests room. Failure ends process here. Success goes to step 2. 2 )Depending on strength of failure, debuffs TM. 3 ) Barrier, somewhere? Thus, warding skill?
Who is being affected, people in the bards group, or people not in the bards group?
And if it's changing, then nevermind. Where are notes on that?
Who is being affected, people in the bards group, or people not in the bards group?
And if it's changing, then nevermind. Where are notes on that?
I'm not sure what the confusion is here.
It's an integrity barrier - TM spells that pass through the barrier have their potency reduced. If it's reduced far enough the TM spell will fizzle.
The only major changes planned to GJ at this time (Aside from general bug fixing and clean up that's planned for all spells) is a total revamp of the messaging.
-Raesh
"Ever notice that B.A.'s flavor text swells in direct proportion to how much one of our characters is getting screwed?" - Brian Van Hoose
It's an integrity barrier - TM spells that pass through the barrier have their potency reduced. If it's reduced far enough the TM spell will fizzle.
The only major changes planned to GJ at this time (Aside from general bug fixing and clean up that's planned for all spells) is a total revamp of the messaging.
-Raesh
"Ever notice that B.A.'s flavor text swells in direct proportion to how much one of our characters is getting screwed?" - Brian Van Hoose
1) Every time GJ pulses, everyone in the room is subject to a Charm vs Will contest (including the bard).
2) If you fail the contest, then every TM spell you cast before the next pulse will have its integrity damaged, regardless of whom you are targeting. The amount of damage depends on how badly you failed the contest.
3) There is no step 3.
Grouping has no effect on GJ.
> And if it's changing, then nevermind. Where are notes on that?
I haven't seen anything to suggest it's changing.
2) If you fail the contest, then every TM spell you cast before the next pulse will have its integrity damaged, regardless of whom you are targeting. The amount of damage depends on how badly you failed the contest.
3) There is no step 3.
Grouping has no effect on GJ.
> And if it's changing, then nevermind. Where are notes on that?
I haven't seen anything to suggest it's changing.
>It's an integrity barrier - TM spells that pass through the barrier have their potency reduced.
Raesh, this is not at all what EPedia or people seem to be telling me the spell is doing. It appears that the spell is placing an outgoing TM integrity debuff on targets that fail the Charm v Will contest.
My initial question was 'Why is the spell doing this, instead of acting like GhS or AC, and placing a TM integrity barrier on the caster or group, instead of a TM integrity debuff on the rest of the room?
Raesh, this is not at all what EPedia or people seem to be telling me the spell is doing. It appears that the spell is placing an outgoing TM integrity debuff on targets that fail the Charm v Will contest.
My initial question was 'Why is the spell doing this, instead of acting like GhS or AC, and placing a TM integrity barrier on the caster or group, instead of a TM integrity debuff on the rest of the room?
>2) If you fail the contest, then every TM spell you cast before the next pulse will have its integrity damaged, regardless of whom you are targeting. The amount of damage depends on how badly you failed the contest.
To me, this sounds like it's a pulsing debuff to TM.
I think the question is, why does it work like this and not as something that gets contested when a TM spell is cast through it?
To me, this sounds like it's a pulsing debuff to TM.
I think the question is, why does it work like this and not as something that gets contested when a TM spell is cast through it?
I didn't realize it was TF only as of now. I will do some testing and let you know.
Again, I'm not disappointed or upset, just making sure it was intended to be this difficult. I don't know what the plans are for instruments in general, but it might be worthwhile to fill in the gaps between tablas and everything else, rather than having a huge leap in difficulty? Just a thought.
I'll let you know how it feels after playing with it some more.
GENT
Again, I'm not disappointed or upset, just making sure it was intended to be this difficult. I don't know what the plans are for instruments in general, but it might be worthwhile to fill in the gaps between tablas and everything else, rather than having a huge leap in difficulty? Just a thought.
I'll let you know how it feels after playing with it some more.
GENT
>Again, I'm not disappointed or upset, just making sure it was intended to be this difficult. I don't know what the plans are for instruments in general, but it might be worthwhile to fill in the gaps between tablas and everything else, rather than having a huge leap in difficulty? Just a thought.
The way it's set up is that there HAS to be a huge gap between say, bagpipes and anything else. Right now, tablas are filling the extreme end of that gap. Once I get some feedback on how they feel to you guys I can proceed to make other instruments with variations. Basically we're working from the top down, so to speak in order to find the upper most limit in terms of what will teach decently at those high ranks. After that I will be reviewing, and seeing if anything needs revision as far as current instruments as well as also trying to fill any gaps as needed. Its the simplest way I could figure out how to work it so I knew what the limitations were going to be.
~Evike
The way it's set up is that there HAS to be a huge gap between say, bagpipes and anything else. Right now, tablas are filling the extreme end of that gap. Once I get some feedback on how they feel to you guys I can proceed to make other instruments with variations. Basically we're working from the top down, so to speak in order to find the upper most limit in terms of what will teach decently at those high ranks. After that I will be reviewing, and seeing if anything needs revision as far as current instruments as well as also trying to fill any gaps as needed. Its the simplest way I could figure out how to work it so I knew what the limitations were going to be.
~Evike
>>Raesh, this is not at all what EPedia or people seem to be telling me the spell is doing.
Elanthipedia is, in this case, wrong.
>>To me, this sounds like it's a pulsing debuff to TM.
It does not debuff TM skill in any way shape or form.
>>I think the question is, why does it work like this and not as something that gets contested when a TM spell is cast through it?
Every TM spell that is cast has to contest the barrier (Assuming it's in place around the caster - as noted there is a SvS contest to put the barrier in place around people).
>>My initial question was 'Why is the spell doing this, instead of acting like GhS or AC, and placing a TM integrity barrier on the caster or group, instead of a TM integrity debuff on the rest of the room?
Because those are entirely different spells. GhS is a damage reduction barrier - Naming of Tears would be a more fitting Bard comparison. Mechanically it is actually rather similar to AC, in that it's an integrity barrier that interferes with the caster as well.
-Raesh
"Ever notice that B.A.'s flavor text swells in direct proportion to how much one of our characters is getting screwed?" - Brian Van Hoose
Elanthipedia is, in this case, wrong.
>>To me, this sounds like it's a pulsing debuff to TM.
It does not debuff TM skill in any way shape or form.
>>I think the question is, why does it work like this and not as something that gets contested when a TM spell is cast through it?
Every TM spell that is cast has to contest the barrier (Assuming it's in place around the caster - as noted there is a SvS contest to put the barrier in place around people).
>>My initial question was 'Why is the spell doing this, instead of acting like GhS or AC, and placing a TM integrity barrier on the caster or group, instead of a TM integrity debuff on the rest of the room?
Because those are entirely different spells. GhS is a damage reduction barrier - Naming of Tears would be a more fitting Bard comparison. Mechanically it is actually rather similar to AC, in that it's an integrity barrier that interferes with the caster as well.
-Raesh
"Ever notice that B.A.'s flavor text swells in direct proportion to how much one of our characters is getting screwed?" - Brian Van Hoose
>The way it's set up is that there HAS to be a huge gap between say, bagpipes and anything else.
Wow, DR never ceases to amaze me with its odd coding and strange technical limitations.
>Desert Maelstrom
What about making DEMA do different things on different pulses? One pulse effect gives you balance, one pulse effect takes balance from things facing you, one would debuff OF on opponents, one would boost evasion, one would debuff ranged ability, etc. It would only have one effect at a time but have lots of different effects and which one it is would be random. The mana could affect the duration of each buff/debuff, but each would be relatively short (length of 1-2 pulses, max). Would something like this be possible, or is multiple small effects still "doing too much?"
Wow, DR never ceases to amaze me with its odd coding and strange technical limitations.
>Desert Maelstrom
What about making DEMA do different things on different pulses? One pulse effect gives you balance, one pulse effect takes balance from things facing you, one would debuff OF on opponents, one would boost evasion, one would debuff ranged ability, etc. It would only have one effect at a time but have lots of different effects and which one it is would be random. The mana could affect the duration of each buff/debuff, but each would be relatively short (length of 1-2 pulses, max). Would something like this be possible, or is multiple small effects still "doing too much?"
>The way it's set up is that there HAS to be a huge gap between say, bagpipes and anything else.
>Wow, DR never ceases to amaze me with its odd coding and strange technical limitations.
Just like with a lot of things, its an older system that didn't account for the ranks in skills we're starting to see now.
I'm just glad I was able to change what I could, even if it is a bit odd!
~Evike
>Wow, DR never ceases to amaze me with its odd coding and strange technical limitations.
Just like with a lot of things, its an older system that didn't account for the ranks in skills we're starting to see now.
I'm just glad I was able to change what I could, even if it is a bit odd!
~Evike
>>What about making DEMA do different things on different pulses? One pulse effect gives you balance, one pulse effect takes balance from things facing you, one would debuff OF on opponents, one would boost evasion, one would debuff ranged ability, etc. It would only have one effect at a time but have lots of different effects and which one it is would be random. The mana could affect the duration of each buff/debuff, but each would be relatively short (length of 1-2 pulses, max). Would something like this be possible, or is multiple small effects still "doing too much
Possible? Yes. What would the slot cost be? I'm not sure off the cuff, it would depend on exactly how it was implemented.
The better question is would that result in a useful and desirable spell?
-Raesh
"Ever notice that B.A.'s flavor text swells in direct proportion to how much one of our characters is getting screwed?" - Brian Van Hoose
Possible? Yes. What would the slot cost be? I'm not sure off the cuff, it would depend on exactly how it was implemented.
The better question is would that result in a useful and desirable spell?
-Raesh
"Ever notice that B.A.'s flavor text swells in direct proportion to how much one of our characters is getting screwed?" - Brian Van Hoose
>It does not debuff TM skill in any way shape or form.
A tingling rhythm tickles the tip of your nose and begins working its way across your skin as the verse of Glythtide's Joy plays at your senses like a sparkling wine.
The aethereal static continues to gather under the call of your spell.
The brocket deer bleats in anger as you cast at it!
The brocket deer bleats in anger as you cast at it!
The brocket deer bleats in anger as you cast at it!
The brocket deer bleats in anger as you cast at it!
So what's going on here? How come when I play in public settings, people are subjected to a check? It seems like the Charm v Will check is contesting everyone BUT me and my group?
>Because those are entirely different spells.
They're TM warding buffs. I'm not suggesting mechanically they do the same thing, I'm asking why GJ is, instead of placing a ward on the caster and/or the casters group, but is instead contesting everyone else in the room.
If EPedia is just wrong about this, and the check to other people is a messaging issue, then just tell me that's where I/we have it wrong. I'm not trying to argue anything, I'm trying to figure out why what I'm seeing my TM ward contest everything else in the room at each pulse instead of just, say, refresh the TM ward on myself or my group.
A tingling rhythm tickles the tip of your nose and begins working its way across your skin as the verse of Glythtide's Joy plays at your senses like a sparkling wine.
The aethereal static continues to gather under the call of your spell.
The brocket deer bleats in anger as you cast at it!
The brocket deer bleats in anger as you cast at it!
The brocket deer bleats in anger as you cast at it!
The brocket deer bleats in anger as you cast at it!
So what's going on here? How come when I play in public settings, people are subjected to a check? It seems like the Charm v Will check is contesting everyone BUT me and my group?
>Because those are entirely different spells.
They're TM warding buffs. I'm not suggesting mechanically they do the same thing, I'm asking why GJ is, instead of placing a ward on the caster and/or the casters group, but is instead contesting everyone else in the room.
If EPedia is just wrong about this, and the check to other people is a messaging issue, then just tell me that's where I/we have it wrong. I'm not trying to argue anything, I'm trying to figure out why what I'm seeing my TM ward contest everything else in the room at each pulse instead of just, say, refresh the TM ward on myself or my group.
> So what's going on here? How come when I play in public settings, people are subjected to a check?
I seem to recall explaining this in post 2333.
> It seems like the Charm v Will check is contesting everyone BUT me and my group?
It's hitting you and your group, too. Just drop the mana, and you'll start getting the message for a successful defense.
I seem to recall explaining this in post 2333.
> It seems like the Charm v Will check is contesting everyone BUT me and my group?
It's hitting you and your group, too. Just drop the mana, and you'll start getting the message for a successful defense.
GJ is not a group effect spell. It is an Area of Effect (AoE) spell, which means it effects everyone in the room not just you or your group. This has been stated several times. There is a contest whether you put the ward on everyone in the room every time it pulses. This ward applies to you and everyone that failed against the check against you (or the people you won the contest against if you want to look at it that way). Once the contest for it being applied is passed they then have a TM integrity ward on them until the next pulse of the your spell. This works like AC which means any outgoing or incoming spell has it's damage diminished or flat out negated, but instead of you having to recast the spell it just renews each pulse since it is cyclic.
>> It seems like the Charm v Will check is contesting everyone BUT me and my group?
I don't know exactly what the contest is, but there is never a contest to put a spell on yourself, it just automatically applies. I would assume the same for your group since they are in your group, I could be wrong about that though. So what you are seeing is the contest of whether you apply the warding barrier to everyone else in the room. This makes complete sense for game balance since you don't want any AoE effects being applied to a room without some kind of contest, beneficial or not.
>>If EPedia is just wrong about this
Raesh already said EPedia is wrong about this spell.
>> It seems like the Charm v Will check is contesting everyone BUT me and my group?
I don't know exactly what the contest is, but there is never a contest to put a spell on yourself, it just automatically applies. I would assume the same for your group since they are in your group, I could be wrong about that though. So what you are seeing is the contest of whether you apply the warding barrier to everyone else in the room. This makes complete sense for game balance since you don't want any AoE effects being applied to a room without some kind of contest, beneficial or not.
>>If EPedia is just wrong about this
Raesh already said EPedia is wrong about this spell.
>I seem to recall explaining this in post 2333.
And I'm asking why instead of just placing an integrity barrier on the bard and the bards group, the spell also places an integrity barrier on opponents. Or is that erroneous messaging?
>It's hitting you and your group, too. Just drop the mana, and you'll start getting the message for a successful defense.
I'm actually not even sure what successful messaging looks like. I just see deer bleating every pulse and people occasionally asking what's that thing that 'passes by them'. For a defensive spell, putting a TM integrity barrier on my opponents seems kind of odd.
And I'm asking why instead of just placing an integrity barrier on the bard and the bards group, the spell also places an integrity barrier on opponents. Or is that erroneous messaging?
>It's hitting you and your group, too. Just drop the mana, and you'll start getting the message for a successful defense.
I'm actually not even sure what successful messaging looks like. I just see deer bleating every pulse and people occasionally asking what's that thing that 'passes by them'. For a defensive spell, putting a TM integrity barrier on my opponents seems kind of odd.
> And I'm asking why instead of just placing an integrity barrier on the bard and the bards group, the spell also places an integrity barrier on opponents. Or is that erroneous messaging?
It puts the barrier on your opponents because it's a barrier that only blocks outgoing spells. That it also puts the barrier on you is a drawback of the spell, not the benefit.
> I'm actually not even sure what successful messaging looks like.
When I cast GJ at min, I get this: "You feel something clingy brush past your body, leaving you unaffected."
When I cast it at full, I get this: "You feel vaguely nausated as an aethereal static gathers around you. It'll be hard to manipulate a targeting matrix like this." (typo btw: nausated)
It puts the barrier on your opponents because it's a barrier that only blocks outgoing spells. That it also puts the barrier on you is a drawback of the spell, not the benefit.
> I'm actually not even sure what successful messaging looks like.
When I cast GJ at min, I get this: "You feel something clingy brush past your body, leaving you unaffected."
When I cast it at full, I get this: "You feel vaguely nausated as an aethereal static gathers around you. It'll be hard to manipulate a targeting matrix like this." (typo btw: nausated)
I added whatever information was on epedia, but that was solely based on the documentation that was provided before 3.0 was released (which was not very clear for this spell). I changed it to say: "TM integrity barrier for outgoing spells."
Is that clear/accurate enough? (I try to keep the effect descriptions as sparse as possible, and put additional notes in the notes section for clarity's sake).
GENT
Is that clear/accurate enough? (I try to keep the effect descriptions as sparse as possible, and put additional notes in the notes section for clarity's sake).
GENT
>It's an integrity barrier - TM spells that pass through the barrier have their potency reduced. If it's reduced far enough the TM spell will fizzle.
Sorry to bring this up so long after, but this goes against what I've heard.
Doesn't an integrity barrier contest integrity of the spell, resulting in either spell failure or no effect?
Doesn't a potency barrier contest potency, resulting in reduction of power, up to and including spell failure?
I'm guessing there was a typo, but I wanted to be sure.
Weapons for Sale:
http://www.elanthipedia.org/wiki/User:Caraamon#Wares
Hunta Talna Kortok, built by Gor'Togs, for Gor'Togs
http://www.angelfire.com/rpg2/caraamon/home.html
Sorry to bring this up so long after, but this goes against what I've heard.
Doesn't an integrity barrier contest integrity of the spell, resulting in either spell failure or no effect?
Doesn't a potency barrier contest potency, resulting in reduction of power, up to and including spell failure?
I'm guessing there was a typo, but I wanted to be sure.
Weapons for Sale:
http://www.elanthipedia.org/wiki/User:Caraamon#Wares
Hunta Talna Kortok, built by Gor'Togs, for Gor'Togs
http://www.angelfire.com/rpg2/caraamon/home.html
> Doesn't an integrity barrier contest integrity of the spell, resulting in either spell failure or no effect?
It doesn't contest integrity, it reduces integrity. If integrity is reduced below min, the spell fails. If not, the spell goes off at full potency. For the most part, this is the same as no effect, but not always. For example, if the spell has a duration, it's easier to dispell since its integrity is reduced.
It doesn't contest integrity, it reduces integrity. If integrity is reduced below min, the spell fails. If not, the spell goes off at full potency. For the most part, this is the same as no effect, but not always. For example, if the spell has a duration, it's easier to dispell since its integrity is reduced.
>>It doesn't contest integrity, it reduces integrity. If integrity is reduced below min, the spell fails. If not, the spell goes off at full potency.
I think I would prefer a potency reducer. It so far seems very hard to shut down someone else's TM with this spell (granted my bard is little), and if you can't shut it down completely the spell is not useful.
-- Player of Eyuve
I think I would prefer a potency reducer. It so far seems very hard to shut down someone else's TM with this spell (granted my bard is little), and if you can't shut it down completely the spell is not useful.
-- Player of Eyuve
