Previous Thread
Previous
Expand All
Collapse All
Ignore Author
Reply
Ya, bards don't have anything but cyclics.
They are totally getting screwed.
It's not like everyone rolled a bard 3.0 because they could one-click to hundreds of free magic ranks in every skill, or anything. Or that the GMs specifically said time after time that cyclic exp wasn't where it was intended or desired. I could keep going.
I'm a badger, I be badgerin'
>>Have you read the post Socharis put up? I'm trying to look out for ya because to me it seems like you ARE the ones getting screwed.
I have, and earlier posts about the likely shakeup of spells (including moving some from cyclic to castable).
I think this is a positive thing, because it moves us into even better balance rather than cyclics being the be-all for training.
Compared to where bards were a year ago, it's been a massive improvement magic-wise, but it was obvious some balancing was needed before the spellbooks could be filled out with existing spell or expanded further. And I say that as someone who's dealt with Bard magic in 3.0 for probably one of the longer periods of time -- so no, I don't think we're getting screwed at all. The more magic as a whole works well with balance, then the better able bards will be to specialize instead of everyone clamoring for cyclics as "uber".
Player of Ryken
---
"Life expectancy would grow by leaps and bounds if green vegetables smelled as good as bacon." ~ Doug Larson
AIM - RykenDR
I have, and earlier posts about the likely shakeup of spells (including moving some from cyclic to castable).
I think this is a positive thing, because it moves us into even better balance rather than cyclics being the be-all for training.
Compared to where bards were a year ago, it's been a massive improvement magic-wise, but it was obvious some balancing was needed before the spellbooks could be filled out with existing spell or expanded further. And I say that as someone who's dealt with Bard magic in 3.0 for probably one of the longer periods of time -- so no, I don't think we're getting screwed at all. The more magic as a whole works well with balance, then the better able bards will be to specialize instead of everyone clamoring for cyclics as "uber".
Player of Ryken
---
"Life expectancy would grow by leaps and bounds if green vegetables smelled as good as bacon." ~ Doug Larson
AIM - RykenDR
>>Have you read the post Socharis put up? I'm trying to look out for ya because to me it seems like you ARE the ones getting screwed.
No. You're not trying to look out for anyone. You're to incite trouble and pass it off as doing it "in the name of Bards". And it's going to stop.
If you, or anyone, wants to discuss the Magic 3.1 changes - guess what? That's what the forums are for. That's why Socharis posted this information in advance. Have at it, we want your feedback and we want your input. Anyone who was part of the 3.0 test realms can vouch for that.
But people who cannot converse civilly will lose the privilege of being part of that discussion.
-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
No. You're not trying to look out for anyone. You're to incite trouble and pass it off as doing it "in the name of Bards". And it's going to stop.
If you, or anyone, wants to discuss the Magic 3.1 changes - guess what? That's what the forums are for. That's why Socharis posted this information in advance. Have at it, we want your feedback and we want your input. Anyone who was part of the 3.0 test realms can vouch for that.
But people who cannot converse civilly will lose the privilege of being part of that discussion.
-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
I don't have a problem with the changes to cyclic EXP at all, but one thing I am curious about are the new feats. Do the changes to buffs, including the new feats, mostly pertain to cast spells or will cyclic/enchante spells require them as well. Many of the bardic enchantes are written as group support so the new feat(s) will seem almost mandatory if there will be a reduction without it, especially for so many spells that already seem lackluster (I'm looking at you Lilt).
Until I get to see how it all works out in the Test realm, I'm not going to freak out. I just thought that this is one place where bards do seem to be a bit at a disadvantage due to spell design.
Until I get to see how it all works out in the Test realm, I'm not going to freak out. I just thought that this is one place where bards do seem to be a bit at a disadvantage due to spell design.
My concern with the changes doesn't have anything to do with cyclic training, at least. It was too easy to put one up and lock quickly and easily. And the cyclics as they came into being when they transferred from 2.0 to 3.0 were, in general, relatively powerful. I can understand why some are being downtweaked or nerfed rather heavily. They're being standardized.
I'm mostly concerned by the fact that there was (in my opinion) a rather sizable gap between number of spell slots given to magic secondary guilds and the total cost of available spells and feats available to Bards. It was already looking to force some tough decisions with regards to spell choice and unpalatable prerequisites. Now 3.1 comes along and says that, in general, spell slot costs are going up, and there will be new feats to aid in the use of group-affecting spells (which is really a strong suit for Bards). Now I'm going to have to not only pay more for my spells than was originally planned, but I'll likely have to shave off even more spells to make room for feats if I want to play to the strengths of my guild?
As I said, tough choices, blah, blah, blah, usual response expected, but it's something that I'm genuinely concerned about. Part of it is still adjusting from 2.0 when we had all spells available to us by low 100th circle, this is true. But I just wanted to make this known as early as possible now that this new 3.1 info is out there.
-Broichan Leshyahen
> hum tuneless
You hum a tuneless tune.
I'm mostly concerned by the fact that there was (in my opinion) a rather sizable gap between number of spell slots given to magic secondary guilds and the total cost of available spells and feats available to Bards. It was already looking to force some tough decisions with regards to spell choice and unpalatable prerequisites. Now 3.1 comes along and says that, in general, spell slot costs are going up, and there will be new feats to aid in the use of group-affecting spells (which is really a strong suit for Bards). Now I'm going to have to not only pay more for my spells than was originally planned, but I'll likely have to shave off even more spells to make room for feats if I want to play to the strengths of my guild?
As I said, tough choices, blah, blah, blah, usual response expected, but it's something that I'm genuinely concerned about. Part of it is still adjusting from 2.0 when we had all spells available to us by low 100th circle, this is true. But I just wanted to make this known as early as possible now that this new 3.1 info is out there.
-Broichan Leshyahen
> hum tuneless
You hum a tuneless tune.
>No. You're not trying to look out for anyone. You're to incite trouble and pass it off as doing it "in the name of Bards". And it's going to stop.
I'm not trying to incite anything. I'm trying to bring issues that I see to the surface. Just because it doesn't fit in with a happy go lucky kinda theme like some of you all might like doesn't mean I'm trying to incite a riot or w/e you may THINK. You don't know me and you don't know what I am trying to do. You can THINK all you want but to insinuate you know something about me expecially as a staff member of this company I believe is unethical. Let a conversation ride see what your playerbase thinks about an idea they may think I am a complete idiot and call me out as such. Then again you may find that some people think like I do and maybe are not as blunt as I will be.
You feel a brief sense of unease, as if somehow, somewhere, you'd run afoul of the law.
I'm not trying to incite anything. I'm trying to bring issues that I see to the surface. Just because it doesn't fit in with a happy go lucky kinda theme like some of you all might like doesn't mean I'm trying to incite a riot or w/e you may THINK. You don't know me and you don't know what I am trying to do. You can THINK all you want but to insinuate you know something about me expecially as a staff member of this company I believe is unethical. Let a conversation ride see what your playerbase thinks about an idea they may think I am a complete idiot and call me out as such. Then again you may find that some people think like I do and maybe are not as blunt as I will be.
You feel a brief sense of unease, as if somehow, somewhere, you'd run afoul of the law.
>In at least three separate threads...
That being the case, let's take the conflicts to conflicts and try to keep the magic discussion in the main folders where they'll be seen by the most people.
Appreciate it.
Edit to add -- Bard centric discussions can definitely take place here, but general stuff should probably go somewhere where everyone will see it.
~Evike
That being the case, let's take the conflicts to conflicts and try to keep the magic discussion in the main folders where they'll be seen by the most people.
Appreciate it.
Edit to add -- Bard centric discussions can definitely take place here, but general stuff should probably go somewhere where everyone will see it.
~Evike
Another glimpse of insanity from the current setup: I finally found the teaching cap for CARE - 1129 ranks.
(Not that this is all that relevant, but it just happened in the past few days and highlights why cyclics are crazy out of line).
I'm being cautiously optimistic about the changes. Hope to get some good testing time on the test server!
GENT
(Not that this is all that relevant, but it just happened in the past few days and highlights why cyclics are crazy out of line).
I'm being cautiously optimistic about the changes. Hope to get some good testing time on the test server!
GENT
>I finally found the teaching cap for CARE - 1129 ranks.
Well, I've only got 900 ranks to go on my Bard.
Kaeta Airtag
"I have faith in the current crop of GMs to not screw people over"
>>Actually an opinion cannot be changed or corrected. Nice try back of line.-VERATHOR
>>But it can be wrong.-Starlear
Well, I've only got 900 ranks to go on my Bard.
Kaeta Airtag
"I have faith in the current crop of GMs to not screw people over"
>>Actually an opinion cannot be changed or corrected. Nice try back of line.-VERATHOR
>>But it can be wrong.-Starlear
