Previous Thread
Expand All
Collapse All
Ignore Author
Reply
Please let us cast Shatter against the eleven races for a short time before Shatter goes the way of Smite foe... I've always wanted to be able to.
>>Please let us cast Shatter against the eleven races for a short time before Shatter goes the way of Smite foe... I've always wanted to be able to.
Your request has been granted. Shatter is castable against most if not all of the races now. Humans (madmen), Dwarves, S'kra, Halflings (Swains), Prydaens, Rakash (in undead form in various locations), and the various Thugs, Ruffians and such which are made up of a fair cross section of the races.
GM Oolan Jeel
"The difference between theory and practice is that in theory, there is no difference between theory and practice."
- Richard Moore
Your request has been granted. Shatter is castable against most if not all of the races now. Humans (madmen), Dwarves, S'kra, Halflings (Swains), Prydaens, Rakash (in undead form in various locations), and the various Thugs, Ruffians and such which are made up of a fair cross section of the races.
GM Oolan Jeel
"The difference between theory and practice is that in theory, there is no difference between theory and practice."
- Richard Moore
>> I still wince every time I cook someone's armor with burn.
Yeah, I gotta say that makes me feel pretty bad too.
Killing someone is a 5 minute inconvenience, oh well, who cares, but wrecking their armor just seems mean and takes so much time to rectify.
I hope equipment damage in general gets evaluated someday.
Rev. Reene
"Shard by shard she rearranges the world.
It looks the same, she says, but it is not.
It looks as they expect, but it is not."
Yeah, I gotta say that makes me feel pretty bad too.
Killing someone is a 5 minute inconvenience, oh well, who cares, but wrecking their armor just seems mean and takes so much time to rectify.
I hope equipment damage in general gets evaluated someday.
Rev. Reene
"Shard by shard she rearranges the world.
It looks the same, she says, but it is not.
It looks as they expect, but it is not."
<<Killing someone is a 5 minute inconvenience, oh well, who cares, but wrecking their armor just seems mean and takes so much time to rectify.>>
Either you guys are missing something or I am. The below statement reads to me that certain creatures: madmen, swains, certain undead, thugs, ruffians. This is basically the 11 races for creatures only (not PCs).
<<Shatter is castable against most if not all of the races now. Humans (madmen), Dwarves, S'kra, Halflings (Swains), Prydaens, Rakash (in undead form in various locations), and the various Thugs, Ruffians and such which are made up of a fair cross section of the races.>>
From my impression, the original post was looking for it to be made castable on PCs and creatures of the 11 races. The example Oolan mentioned only lists creatures of the 11 races.
- Simon
Either you guys are missing something or I am. The below statement reads to me that certain creatures: madmen, swains, certain undead, thugs, ruffians. This is basically the 11 races for creatures only (not PCs).
<<Shatter is castable against most if not all of the races now. Humans (madmen), Dwarves, S'kra, Halflings (Swains), Prydaens, Rakash (in undead form in various locations), and the various Thugs, Ruffians and such which are made up of a fair cross section of the races.>>
From my impression, the original post was looking for it to be made castable on PCs and creatures of the 11 races. The example Oolan mentioned only lists creatures of the 11 races.
- Simon
Yeah, seems like nobody understood that there was no change.
I agree that item breakage in general serves no purpose than to upset people. It would be much better and make more sense to just make the stuff go down to 1/100 durability and make it cost much more money to repair.
Someone's armor/weapon that they have had altered or owned for ten rl years or whatever shouldn't be subject to permanent destruction via pvp or some invasion where creatures just happen to break armor easily.
-Mr. Glemm
I agree that item breakage in general serves no purpose than to upset people. It would be much better and make more sense to just make the stuff go down to 1/100 durability and make it cost much more money to repair.
Someone's armor/weapon that they have had altered or owned for ten rl years or whatever shouldn't be subject to permanent destruction via pvp or some invasion where creatures just happen to break armor easily.
-Mr. Glemm
<<I still say armor should be capped at a point before total destruction and at that point make it totally useless until repaired.
QFT. If there is no chance you are going to absolutely lose the gear entirely, well I may not like doing armor damage (or receiving it) but it is a much better solution that the alternative.
Madigan
As true as this is, I've always held Elanthia's ultimate end will shortly follow after either an "Oops." or a "Hey, that's neat." from within a Moon Mage guild.
QFT. If there is no chance you are going to absolutely lose the gear entirely, well I may not like doing armor damage (or receiving it) but it is a much better solution that the alternative.
Madigan
As true as this is, I've always held Elanthia's ultimate end will shortly follow after either an "Oops." or a "Hey, that's neat." from within a Moon Mage guild.
Sorry for the double post can't seem to go all they way back but here is a referance.
http://www.play.net/forums/messages.asp?forum=20&category=30&topic=11&message=7620
A s'sugi malchata attempts to evade, mis-stepping and blundering into the blow. The shield lands an awesome strike that explodes the chest in a shower of blood and splintered ribs.
A s'sugi malchata crumbles to the ground.
http://www.play.net/forums/messages.asp?forum=20&category=30&topic=11&message=7620
A s'sugi malchata attempts to evade, mis-stepping and blundering into the blow. The shield lands an awesome strike that explodes the chest in a shower of blood and splintered ribs.
A s'sugi malchata crumbles to the ground.
I guess I look at shatter a little bit differently. If the PvP I'm involved in is consentual and fun for everyone involved, shatter remains in its do not use pile.
If I'm forced to engage in PvP due to someone being a complete and utter snert, a snap cast of shatter sends a loud and clear message of "Don't mess with me, I'm dead serious, continue to do so and you'll regret it."
A single snap cast won't do much damage to their equipment, but suddenly them acting like a complete waste of space isn't worth them losing their gear. Their attitude changes quickly and they wander off.
It's kinda sad that the loss of gear is a bigger deterrent then death, but lets face it death isn't anything more then an inconvenience.
~Player of Zaud (Platinum)
If I'm forced to engage in PvP due to someone being a complete and utter snert, a snap cast of shatter sends a loud and clear message of "Don't mess with me, I'm dead serious, continue to do so and you'll regret it."
A single snap cast won't do much damage to their equipment, but suddenly them acting like a complete waste of space isn't worth them losing their gear. Their attitude changes quickly and they wander off.
It's kinda sad that the loss of gear is a bigger deterrent then death, but lets face it death isn't anything more then an inconvenience.
~Player of Zaud (Platinum)
>>If I'm forced to engage in PvP due to someone being a complete and utter snert, a snap cast of shatter sends a loud and clear message of "Don't mess with me, I'm dead serious, continue to do so and you'll regret it."<<
This would make you a real jerk on an OOC level. You know that, right?
- Mazrian
The Flying Company
http://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d194/huldahspal/flyingcompany.png
This would make you a real jerk on an OOC level. You know that, right?
- Mazrian
The Flying Company
http://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d194/huldahspal/flyingcompany.png
I'm firmly in the get rid of destroyed beyond repair camp. Let it hit a point where it is broken, and can't be used, but, like the shards of Narsil, a good enough smith can repair it. Make it SUPER expensive from npc's, and part of the forging rewrite.
Then, shattering someone's gear becomes less of a jerk thing to do, and more of a viable battle tactic.
Then, shattering someone's gear becomes less of a jerk thing to do, and more of a viable battle tactic.
>I always used shatter on unarmored critters since against armored foes its near useless unless your magics far surpass them. I wasn't even really thinking about its armor damaging abilities...
Back when I was hunting ogres with HT as my primary weapon, I found shatter indispensable. With relatively low magics, 3 min-prep snap casts of shatter destroyed their shield. 2 more casts got rid of their mace, and about 1 more after that to break their armor. I normally stopped after the shield, since that's the biggest detriment to training thrown. The damage against unarmored foes is decent (shatter does wonders on avengers), but to me, the main draw of the spell is to damage equipment to give yourself tactical advantage.
Back when I was hunting ogres with HT as my primary weapon, I found shatter indispensable. With relatively low magics, 3 min-prep snap casts of shatter destroyed their shield. 2 more casts got rid of their mace, and about 1 more after that to break their armor. I normally stopped after the shield, since that's the biggest detriment to training thrown. The damage against unarmored foes is decent (shatter does wonders on avengers), but to me, the main draw of the spell is to damage equipment to give yourself tactical advantage.
>>Either way, all chain stuns are broken and I doubt they're going away soon if they just introduced a new one into the game.
The problem with chain stunning is an issue with the underlying mechanic of being stunned. Creation of another spell which happens to use that single mechanic does not noticeably increase the time it'll take to change it.
-Armifer
"In our days truth is taken to result from the effacing of the living man behind the mathematical structures that think themselves out in him, rather than he be thinking them." - Emmanuel Levinas
The problem with chain stunning is an issue with the underlying mechanic of being stunned. Creation of another spell which happens to use that single mechanic does not noticeably increase the time it'll take to change it.
-Armifer
"In our days truth is taken to result from the effacing of the living man behind the mathematical structures that think themselves out in him, rather than he be thinking them." - Emmanuel Levinas
>>The problem with chain stunning is an issue with the underlying mechanic of being stunned. Creation of another spell which happens to use that single mechanic does not noticeably increase the time it'll take to change it.>>
Any idea if they're going to be put on a diminishing returns system (can chain stun until x amount of casts, with each successive cast being less effective) or going to be changed so that a stunning spell will have zero effect on something/someone already stunned?
Another quick question about diminishing returns on disablers/stuns. Will it be changed so that the spell will suffer diminishing returns if cast immediately after the spells effects wear off? For example, with sick, you can use it infinitely as long as you cast it again the split second the spell wears off. Kind of defeats the purpose of the diminishing returns aspect. This goes for all spells like this, and not just sick (I just happen to be a cleric, so I'm using it as an example).
Any idea if they're going to be put on a diminishing returns system (can chain stun until x amount of casts, with each successive cast being less effective) or going to be changed so that a stunning spell will have zero effect on something/someone already stunned?
Another quick question about diminishing returns on disablers/stuns. Will it be changed so that the spell will suffer diminishing returns if cast immediately after the spells effects wear off? For example, with sick, you can use it infinitely as long as you cast it again the split second the spell wears off. Kind of defeats the purpose of the diminishing returns aspect. This goes for all spells like this, and not just sick (I just happen to be a cleric, so I'm using it as an example).
I am being extraordinarily vague on what removing chain stunning means (and the time frame we have to do it in) because the plans we'd like to run with take some magic and combat changes into account which do not exist yet. It wouldn't sound the same outside that context.
-Armifer
"In our days truth is taken to result from the effacing of the living man behind the mathematical structures that think themselves out in him, rather than he be thinking them." - Emmanuel Levinas
-Armifer
"In our days truth is taken to result from the effacing of the living man behind the mathematical structures that think themselves out in him, rather than he be thinking them." - Emmanuel Levinas
<<Any idea if they're going to be put on a diminishing returns system (can chain stun until x amount of casts, with each successive cast being less effective) or going to be changed so that a stunning spell will have zero effect on something/someone already stunned?
My favored answer to this would be to put the change in the core stun mechanics itself so ALL stuns have diminishing returns (based on stats maybe?). This would have the secondary effect of helping to remove those stun spirals of death you see on the low to medium end of the critter ladder. The ones where you just stand there for 20 seconds until one manages to finally bring your vitality to zero.
- George, Player of Foresee
My favored answer to this would be to put the change in the core stun mechanics itself so ALL stuns have diminishing returns (based on stats maybe?). This would have the secondary effect of helping to remove those stun spirals of death you see on the low to medium end of the critter ladder. The ones where you just stand there for 20 seconds until one manages to finally bring your vitality to zero.
- George, Player of Foresee
