Previous Thread
Previous
Expand All
Collapse All
Ignore Author
Reply
> but I'm also not about to have sympathy for them either
I haven't seen anyone ask for sympathy or make demands. Well, maybe aside from Arshwick, who is demanding that GUB owners not get anything else for the change. I don't even see a great wailing and gnashing of teeth from anyone, aside from that. But there is also the obvious point that no one is going to invest a lot of real world resources on a virtual item if said items have a high risk of losing their primary relative value. I think the general effort is to avoid that, assuming the item was serving as intended.
And that's okay. Myself, I'm still playing either way.
But it does affect future decisions about how to spend resources. It's not a threat. It's not rage. Generally staff have been pretty good, in my opinion, about making fair adjustments, which is why I echoed Vey's thoughts.
For what it's worth, when I got my own GUB, it was on a plane vanilla (albeit perfect crafted) handaxe. I'd have done the sanctifying, etc. first. The bane part, for me, was secondary to being able to melee undead with a weapon I would later enchant and ensorcel. Permabless certs weren't being offered at the time.
By the way, for myself, I have no opinion about Permablesses. I'm not upset regardless of how those owners are addressed.
They've spent the money on that item...
...but they have also had the use of that item--with its expanded powers--for the period of time until the change happened.
.
Yes, I agree that the Sanctification certificates before February did not have the "hey, we're thinking of changing things so Caveat Emptor" disclaimer, but even if the cert was used last August, that's six months of "You Smite Undead More Better."
...but they have also had the use of that item--with its expanded powers--for the period of time until the change happened.
.
Yes, I agree that the Sanctification certificates before February did not have the "hey, we're thinking of changing things so Caveat Emptor" disclaimer, but even if the cert was used last August, that's six months of "You Smite Undead More Better."
>Influence, on the other hand, massively penalizes many races that pures play.
Influence lost its original reason for existence (the stat that affects NPC human reactions to your character) a long time ago. Its been given a different role, but the race bonuses haven't been changed to reflect that new role. The consequence is that the justification for which races gets bonuses and penalties on new uses for INF can be quite bizarre. I find it amusing when I'm getting a racial bonus that I shouldn't and infuriating when the opposite applies.
Please add Ironwright to the list of items/scripts to be looked at. It was a 200k bs purchase in the days when Permabless was a 300k bs purchase.
I just want to make sure it will be fully compatible with the new ability to have holy sprinkler flares, script flares and flares in the Flare Slot. If not, could its script be adjusted to do so? If not, could a conversion option to the new system be considered? (T0, perm water sprinkler flare maybe?).
Thanks!
I just want to make sure it will be fully compatible with the new ability to have holy sprinkler flares, script flares and flares in the Flare Slot. If not, could its script be adjusted to do so? If not, could a conversion option to the new system be considered? (T0, perm water sprinkler flare maybe?).
Thanks!
It's fairly likely that any new professional services will conflict with a high end offering of some kind.
Maybe players who added the script recently can get a refund, but only with the understanding that this merchant service might not be offered again, might become a rare offering, and will cost more in the future.
Maybe players who added the script recently can get a refund, but only with the understanding that this merchant service might not be offered again, might become a rare offering, and will cost more in the future.
The new bless system proposal looks amazing. Really great stuff, and a long needed revamp for an old outdated system.
I don't understand the complaints of people with their high end weapons (and part of me wonders if it's an attempt to merely squeeze more out of simu). Your weapons still continue to do what they did before (hit undead without penalty), except now you get an AS boost on top of that, plus the ability to add more flares/etc on that weapon as well that you couldn't before. You are losing nothing, and gaining more.
I look forward to this update being rolled out, and I also look forward to being able to add more weighting and new flares to some of my weapons that I couldn't before without impacting the old bless system's effectiveness. This looks like a great update.
I don't understand the complaints of people with their high end weapons (and part of me wonders if it's an attempt to merely squeeze more out of simu). Your weapons still continue to do what they did before (hit undead without penalty), except now you get an AS boost on top of that, plus the ability to add more flares/etc on that weapon as well that you couldn't before. You are losing nothing, and gaining more.
I look forward to this update being rolled out, and I also look forward to being able to add more weighting and new flares to some of my weapons that I couldn't before without impacting the old bless system's effectiveness. This looks like a great update.
Krakii is merely stating the standard position in regard to policy. Below is the full policy.
Agree with it or not, spending large sums of real money, silvers, etc. is a personal decision. When you get down to it there is no value whatsoever in any of the items in game other than your perception. The reason being Gemstone may one day go the way of many other such games before it and simply cease service. As much as some of us may enjoy and love the game, there is no guarantee that the game will continue service forever. It could cease service tomorrow. Good luck if you think you're recouping anything.
We could go down the rabbit hole of "personal accountability and responsibility" but these tangents of players' perception in regard to changes of items does nothing for the greater good as it pertains to game balance and improving the overall experience for the majority of players new and old. I imagine it is soul-draining for GMs as well.
Personally I think our GMs coddle the playerbase far to much. It is best to view things purchased in this game like purchasing a car or computer. The goods in the game depreciate quickly and could potentially be obsolete in 6 months to a year or the next major technological breakthrough. The other route dev could go is leave in place the existing bless mechanics and just introduce a new mechanic or script that makes the old mechanic obsolete.
| GemStone IV Player Policy: Game Mechanics and Game Changes |
| Simutronics reserves the right to make modifications to any and all game mechanics and rules at any time, without notice. |
| Simutronics has a responsibility to preserve the balance of the game for the majority of the players, and furthermore, to maintain a level of challenge that is adequate for this type of product. Therefore, Simutronics will routinely add new rules, modify existing rules, and even go back and change new additions that did not function as expected. |
| These changes can impact your character in a variety of ways. If you feel that the change unfairly penalizes your character, or your character type, given the requirements of balance, challenge, and the general good of the game, then you may make your views known to Simutronics via GemStone IV Feedback (not ASSIST or REPORT). |
| Simutronics maintains a longer range view which may be in conflict with short-term and character-specific interests, but Simutronics will always attempt to make the best decision for the overall good of the game. |
Agree with it or not, spending large sums of real money, silvers, etc. is a personal decision. When you get down to it there is no value whatsoever in any of the items in game other than your perception. The reason being Gemstone may one day go the way of many other such games before it and simply cease service. As much as some of us may enjoy and love the game, there is no guarantee that the game will continue service forever. It could cease service tomorrow. Good luck if you think you're recouping anything.
We could go down the rabbit hole of "personal accountability and responsibility" but these tangents of players' perception in regard to changes of items does nothing for the greater good as it pertains to game balance and improving the overall experience for the majority of players new and old. I imagine it is soul-draining for GMs as well.
Personally I think our GMs coddle the playerbase far to much. It is best to view things purchased in this game like purchasing a car or computer. The goods in the game depreciate quickly and could potentially be obsolete in 6 months to a year or the next major technological breakthrough. The other route dev could go is leave in place the existing bless mechanics and just introduce a new mechanic or script that makes the old mechanic obsolete.
| As I gaze over the horizon, the wind tugs at my cloak and whispers, "Adventure" in my ear. |
| A squeaky halfling nearby asks, "Why you playing with orcs heads and troll rearends?!" |
Another good example in my opinion is trading cards. From Pokemon to Magic the Gathering, all it takes is a set of rule changes or tournament ban to tank the value of a card that used to be worth thousands of dollars. There are many examples of this throughout various types of gaming.
The business model, again in my opinion, of the game at this point is to get the rather small playerbase (in the grand scheme of things) to continuously purchase simucoins for paid events to earn currency to purchase new combat and fluff related items (scripts). This is further encouraged by changing how existing game system mechanics function to encourage new playstyles that require new purchases or to make existing playstyles obsolete to encourage new purchases.
I'm perfectly fine with this. I enjoy the changes dev has introduced to the game after decades of stagnation regardless of its monetary impact on my wallet. In fact, I was firmly in the camp of Simutronics is evil for introducing microtransactions and currency paid events and abstained from participation for a couple of years. Then I gave in because dev actually started making the game vastly more fun to play and introducing really cool scripts at Duskruin.
The business model, again in my opinion, of the game at this point is to get the rather small playerbase (in the grand scheme of things) to continuously purchase simucoins for paid events to earn currency to purchase new combat and fluff related items (scripts). This is further encouraged by changing how existing game system mechanics function to encourage new playstyles that require new purchases or to make existing playstyles obsolete to encourage new purchases.
I'm perfectly fine with this. I enjoy the changes dev has introduced to the game after decades of stagnation regardless of its monetary impact on my wallet. In fact, I was firmly in the camp of Simutronics is evil for introducing microtransactions and currency paid events and abstained from participation for a couple of years. Then I gave in because dev actually started making the game vastly more fun to play and introducing really cool scripts at Duskruin.
| As I gaze over the horizon, the wind tugs at my cloak and whispers, "Adventure" in my ear. |
| A squeaky halfling nearby asks, "Why you playing with orcs heads and troll rearends?!" |
Unpopular opinion, I guess, but I dislike the move to Cat C. Basically, all weapons are now better against Undead than Living, as 304 with holy flares can be easily stacked on top of any existing properties. Also, I dislike the continuing move towards having one single weapon that can do everything. I prefer being forced to have multiple weapons for different scenarios. I didn't like it when they made it so you can add every type weighting and a flare to the same weapon, and now that any high end weapon can be easily blessed as well I dislike it even more.
330 seems good though, with the caveat that I still think you should force choice by making it incompatible with more things.
330 seems good though, with the caveat that I still think you should force choice by making it incompatible with more things.
Also, forgot to add I don't like the anchoring effect for 304. I like the unique challenge for non-corp of having to RT-lock them or time your kill shot if you want the loot. Can leave anchoring as a unique high-end weapon ability if you want, or maybe a 330 T5 perk, but effectively handing it everyone is just watering down the game even further.
I try to keep my comments fairly neutral in tone.
A) I like the bless doc. My only real issue is the blurring of the line on what a paladin that a warrior shouldn't be able to do has bled over far more. At least without the bless changes, it was stuck behind a :whale: $$. Now, a feature that's a bit class-defining (clerics and paladins kill undead) is just minimized even further to just a few million silvers.
People generally chose classes that fit what they mechanically want to do, with the limitations accepted as non-issues. (Priority-wise, wizards sacrifice strength for mana, warriors sacrifice mana for strength).
B) I'm not certain what the priority is for a paladin vs a warrior. From a traditional stand-point, a paladin is Party leader (not exactly something that's accomplished the most often in gemstone), tank, and utility (Think party healer in a pinch, burst DPS vs undead, ultra tanky vs undead, and spells that protect others)
C) Warriors (I'll accept barbarians even) are generally split between Tank and DPS, and I think this works well in GS as warriors CAN go sword and board or TWC/2HW. Undead generally have almost always been a weaker point for warriors, not that they were doing damage, just not where they shine.
D) Clerics generally are protection, resurrection, and dominating/destroying the undead.
I think with the bless document we fix definitively fix the problems presented in GS from a traditional point... Warriors (and all melee now) are better deal with the undead.
But this now (IMHO) creates a few issues.
1) clerics will have less use for the spell 'bless' devaluing that spell. This is taken care of by way of creating the sanctification service. I consider this right-of-neutral, as clerics will now earn coin, to permanently change things, and BLESS is not just canceled out.
2) All melee-based class builds will basically have equal undead hunting capabilities by cap. If a warrior starts from level 0 the day this is implemented, there is no reason that by 50, they shouldn't really be hitting undead just as hard as a cleric/paladin with sanctified equipment, the proposed off-set allows for clerics/paladins to handle Sanctified as a T5 sanctification, but does nothing to further a part of class-defining capabilities (hunting undead). Some would consider this Neutral but I view it left of neutral, or a loss. Something that is a traditional role is now basically equalized across the board.
Why play a paladin?.. Whats the point? what class-defining piece do I get, if it can be trumped as easily as going to the cleric shop, buying a white sapara, asking a cleric to sanctify it to t1? I'm supposed to be a holy warrior, yet were making it more like not-so-holy.
What will happen with Iasha that have profession unlocks?
What about shields vs undead. As of now I can't even use my shield against most undead. Assuming this does not change, warriors can now have their spiked shields flare and do damage against the undead, something that makes me different.
If shields get upgraded so I can shield bash/strike the undead and this is implemented, Warriors will gain it as well, giving them an even greater arsenal to do combat with.
What is separating a warrior from a paladin? Undead was one of the seperations and now we've muddied that.
I propose that sanctification not just work out of the box for clerics/paladins. I propose clerics/paladins receive a modicum upgrade when fighting only undead to maintain the spirit of Holy. For instance, Sanctification for clerics/paladins work as suggested, but increasing an item's Sanctification Tier (Creating more 'drive/silver sink' for sanctification and truly allowing all classes to benefit from it).
Possibly one way of achieving this is giving t1-t5 sanctified materials specifically in the hands of paladins/clerics, additional flares that fire only against the undead (Possibly such as holy water/acid/fire flares, maybe tie it to the wielders Arkati, I'm not certain)
Dont' get me wrong, I think the document is great, but with the power creep one thing does become more evident, why even bother as a paladin?
-Khaell
A) I like the bless doc. My only real issue is the blurring of the line on what a paladin that a warrior shouldn't be able to do has bled over far more. At least without the bless changes, it was stuck behind a :whale: $$. Now, a feature that's a bit class-defining (clerics and paladins kill undead) is just minimized even further to just a few million silvers.
People generally chose classes that fit what they mechanically want to do, with the limitations accepted as non-issues. (Priority-wise, wizards sacrifice strength for mana, warriors sacrifice mana for strength).
B) I'm not certain what the priority is for a paladin vs a warrior. From a traditional stand-point, a paladin is Party leader (not exactly something that's accomplished the most often in gemstone), tank, and utility (Think party healer in a pinch, burst DPS vs undead, ultra tanky vs undead, and spells that protect others)
C) Warriors (I'll accept barbarians even) are generally split between Tank and DPS, and I think this works well in GS as warriors CAN go sword and board or TWC/2HW. Undead generally have almost always been a weaker point for warriors, not that they were doing damage, just not where they shine.
D) Clerics generally are protection, resurrection, and dominating/destroying the undead.
I think with the bless document we fix definitively fix the problems presented in GS from a traditional point... Warriors (and all melee now) are better deal with the undead.
But this now (IMHO) creates a few issues.
1) clerics will have less use for the spell 'bless' devaluing that spell. This is taken care of by way of creating the sanctification service. I consider this right-of-neutral, as clerics will now earn coin, to permanently change things, and BLESS is not just canceled out.
2) All melee-based class builds will basically have equal undead hunting capabilities by cap. If a warrior starts from level 0 the day this is implemented, there is no reason that by 50, they shouldn't really be hitting undead just as hard as a cleric/paladin with sanctified equipment, the proposed off-set allows for clerics/paladins to handle Sanctified as a T5 sanctification, but does nothing to further a part of class-defining capabilities (hunting undead). Some would consider this Neutral but I view it left of neutral, or a loss. Something that is a traditional role is now basically equalized across the board.
Why play a paladin?.. Whats the point? what class-defining piece do I get, if it can be trumped as easily as going to the cleric shop, buying a white sapara, asking a cleric to sanctify it to t1? I'm supposed to be a holy warrior, yet were making it more like not-so-holy.
What will happen with Iasha that have profession unlocks?
What about shields vs undead. As of now I can't even use my shield against most undead. Assuming this does not change, warriors can now have their spiked shields flare and do damage against the undead, something that makes me different.
If shields get upgraded so I can shield bash/strike the undead and this is implemented, Warriors will gain it as well, giving them an even greater arsenal to do combat with.
What is separating a warrior from a paladin? Undead was one of the seperations and now we've muddied that.
I propose that sanctification not just work out of the box for clerics/paladins. I propose clerics/paladins receive a modicum upgrade when fighting only undead to maintain the spirit of Holy. For instance, Sanctification for clerics/paladins work as suggested, but increasing an item's Sanctification Tier (Creating more 'drive/silver sink' for sanctification and truly allowing all classes to benefit from it).
Possibly one way of achieving this is giving t1-t5 sanctified materials specifically in the hands of paladins/clerics, additional flares that fire only against the undead (Possibly such as holy water/acid/fire flares, maybe tie it to the wielders Arkati, I'm not certain)
Dont' get me wrong, I think the document is great, but with the power creep one thing does become more evident, why even bother as a paladin?
-Khaell
I really like pretty much everything. No real complaints from this warrior's perspective. However, I agree with those who are saying the legacy bonuses are underwhelming. I don't have GUB on my primary permablessed weapon, though I have really wanted to add it for years now -- I just can't afford it. Had I be able to snag GUB at 500k I would be pretty bummed about +10. I don't know exactly what would offset the perceived undervalued legacy bonus, but +5/+10 (assuming to undead only) is, I think, fairly underwhelming. I would have expected probably double that on both, or at the very least GUB simply because it's astronomically expensive to get via cert.
While equalizing the ability to hunt undead between all melee and pure characters has been important since day 1, I feel we throw away a lot more than we replace by doing so.
This isn't to say it's not necessary... It is. It's long past time where squares and semis we're not limited in hunting grounds if the didn't choose voln as a society.
That said, one of the major draws and defining aspects of the cleric and paladin was the exclusive ease in fighting undead without spending thousands of dollars worth of in game currency to access a weapon that bypassed this system. And now, with the current proposal, I see no reason anyone would create a paladin instead of simply roleplaying a warrior as one. I feel we've gone a giant step backward to ~2002 with this change.
Clerics at least have spells that are specifically used against the undead. Paladins however, cease to have an identity as their primary defining aspect, 1625 and easy access to undead hunting, is now mass produced through an unrestricted player service.
I won't pretend to know the answer to this. But some suggestions would be to (drastically) increase paladin effectiveness versus undead, a complete overhaul of 1625 that puts it as superior to the (now permablessable) warrior bond, or a new toolset that bolsters like level undead combat past what is capable through standard AS/DS/SMR equations.
Another option is to decouple paladins from undead as an identifier to begin with, and redefine them as something entirely new. Group leaders, damage sponges, magic resistant, or having completely devastating magical attacks through martial means using the power of the arkati are all options.
Any identifying characteristics that are easily duplicatable through a simple weapon service will do no favors. I pulled another "who prof" last night and revealed 17 paladins online (unchanged since before the overhaul) versus 78 warriors. These are metrics that I would read as end-of-life for the class.
This isn't to say it's not necessary... It is. It's long past time where squares and semis we're not limited in hunting grounds if the didn't choose voln as a society.
That said, one of the major draws and defining aspects of the cleric and paladin was the exclusive ease in fighting undead without spending thousands of dollars worth of in game currency to access a weapon that bypassed this system. And now, with the current proposal, I see no reason anyone would create a paladin instead of simply roleplaying a warrior as one. I feel we've gone a giant step backward to ~2002 with this change.
Clerics at least have spells that are specifically used against the undead. Paladins however, cease to have an identity as their primary defining aspect, 1625 and easy access to undead hunting, is now mass produced through an unrestricted player service.
I won't pretend to know the answer to this. But some suggestions would be to (drastically) increase paladin effectiveness versus undead, a complete overhaul of 1625 that puts it as superior to the (now permablessable) warrior bond, or a new toolset that bolsters like level undead combat past what is capable through standard AS/DS/SMR equations.
Another option is to decouple paladins from undead as an identifier to begin with, and redefine them as something entirely new. Group leaders, damage sponges, magic resistant, or having completely devastating magical attacks through martial means using the power of the arkati are all options.
Any identifying characteristics that are easily duplicatable through a simple weapon service will do no favors. I pulled another "who prof" last night and revealed 17 paladins online (unchanged since before the overhaul) versus 78 warriors. These are metrics that I would read as end-of-life for the class.
My perspective is that of a player of a warrior who has essentially been RP'd with a "paladin-like" personality and style since well before paladin class was rolled out. In fact, that used to be the route to go pre-paladin if you wanted to play a holy-warrior. Many converted to paladin, others didn't because they had years invested as a warrior, and didn't want to ret-con even though the "new" class looked amazing (even typing "new" class considering how long ago that was makes me feel old).
I would say that the paladin class isn't mechanically losing anything, in fact is gaining the same benefits of the new system same as the rest of the classes, it's just maybe not as big a relative benefit as it is for say, warriors. Paladins and warriors still have plenty to differentiate them, in my view. Spend a bit of time with a warrior TD and it will be apparent. Full spell circle, spells (offensive and defensive), armored casting, superior AS, superior DS, Redux, superior TD. Heck, raising the dead. I mean...paladins are great, and I would consider these mechanics also as class defining, more so than killing undead, which is a sort of ubiquitous character defining trait/goal for many characters of all professions, via the Order of Voln.
Full disclosure, I was also long in the camp of warriors who was jealous by how the paladin rollout seemed to so conveniently fix so many of the weaknesses of warriors without much apparent downside. So for me, it's more been a years/decades long process of bringing warriors/squares back into line with the apparent mechanical superiority of paladins (and other semis). Again, just to offer a different perspective.
I totally respect that the paladin class may feel put off by what does appear to be a narrowing of the uniqueness gap but...for someone who has been in Voln for decades, has RP'd as a very devout or "holy warrior," if you will, I have never felt that warriors are supposed to be weak against undead nor do I think it's incompatible with what warriors are supposed to be. I mean, prior to Sunfist, most warriors joined Voln; there have always been TONS of warriors devoted to killing undead. Warriors still have a lower self-generated AS, am at risk of getting owned by CS/TD resolutions at like level and have to spend TPs at rates only viable far far far post cap if I want to mutant into spell casting (which I still will never be able to cast with armor on). Paladins are still awesome!
And I'm super excited that most hilariously frustrating of occurrences, that of having your bless wear off mid-berserk, will be relegated to the annals of history. Honestly, considering that getting blesses aren't a problem for Voln members anyway, this is, like, the main thing I'm so happy about. It will make my berserk slightly less dangerous to use on high level undead. And making some of our weighted weapons blessable, that too...awesome.
Mohrgan glances between Mohrgan and Mohrgan.
I would say that the paladin class isn't mechanically losing anything, in fact is gaining the same benefits of the new system same as the rest of the classes, it's just maybe not as big a relative benefit as it is for say, warriors. Paladins and warriors still have plenty to differentiate them, in my view. Spend a bit of time with a warrior TD and it will be apparent. Full spell circle, spells (offensive and defensive), armored casting, superior AS, superior DS, Redux, superior TD. Heck, raising the dead. I mean...paladins are great, and I would consider these mechanics also as class defining, more so than killing undead, which is a sort of ubiquitous character defining trait/goal for many characters of all professions, via the Order of Voln.
Full disclosure, I was also long in the camp of warriors who was jealous by how the paladin rollout seemed to so conveniently fix so many of the weaknesses of warriors without much apparent downside. So for me, it's more been a years/decades long process of bringing warriors/squares back into line with the apparent mechanical superiority of paladins (and other semis). Again, just to offer a different perspective.
I totally respect that the paladin class may feel put off by what does appear to be a narrowing of the uniqueness gap but...for someone who has been in Voln for decades, has RP'd as a very devout or "holy warrior," if you will, I have never felt that warriors are supposed to be weak against undead nor do I think it's incompatible with what warriors are supposed to be. I mean, prior to Sunfist, most warriors joined Voln; there have always been TONS of warriors devoted to killing undead. Warriors still have a lower self-generated AS, am at risk of getting owned by CS/TD resolutions at like level and have to spend TPs at rates only viable far far far post cap if I want to mutant into spell casting (which I still will never be able to cast with armor on). Paladins are still awesome!
And I'm super excited that most hilariously frustrating of occurrences, that of having your bless wear off mid-berserk, will be relegated to the annals of history. Honestly, considering that getting blesses aren't a problem for Voln members anyway, this is, like, the main thing I'm so happy about. It will make my berserk slightly less dangerous to use on high level undead. And making some of our weighted weapons blessable, that too...awesome.
Mohrgan glances between Mohrgan and Mohrgan.
I'm not going write a long debate or justification, I'm just going to say that, as an owner of all the affect things (GUB, LUB, Perma, White Alloy, etc) and a player of all professions, I have no issues with this change. I have no issue with v1, either. Anything small bit I may lose from this change is well worth the positives. Please, let's make this be sooner rather than later.
- Andreas
- Andreas
>Another option is to decouple paladins from undead as an identifier to begin with, and redefine them as something entirely new. Group leaders, damage sponges, magic resistant, or having completely devastating magical attacks through martial means using the power of the arkati are all options.
This is the answer. The current incarnation of paladins is basically D&D. This never made sense for Elanthia, and IMO it was only done to satiate the desires of people that don't care about setting and lore and just wanted to play a Gemstone version of a D&D paladin regardless of whether it fit. For example, a swashbuckling wanderer, chosen of Tonis, should bear little resemblance to such a narrow archetype.
This narrow archetype that doesn't fit the game is the source of the problem. Development to make the profession more interesting has been driven toward 'warrior stuff', since doubling down on the lawful good holy warrior thing makes so little sense that even devs willing to put paladins in the game as they are now wouldn't do it. 'Warrior stuff' is general enough not to cross this line, but the result is the abomination that paladins are today - semis that break all the semi rules, or squares that break all the square rules. I'm not saying they are imbalanced, I'm just saying they shatter all the fuzzy lines that have separated squares and semis for 30 years.
The solution? Hah, I don't know if there is one at this point. A massive overhaul of paladins to make their abilities unique, and conform to their Arkati of choice? That's a mountain of work though. I've said it before and I'll say it again - paladins were a mistake, and they should have just kept it as a supported path for clerics. I don't see any of these fundamental problems as realistically solvable, and since so few people play paladins, I doubt there is a satisfactory answer to the OP.
This is the answer. The current incarnation of paladins is basically D&D. This never made sense for Elanthia, and IMO it was only done to satiate the desires of people that don't care about setting and lore and just wanted to play a Gemstone version of a D&D paladin regardless of whether it fit. For example, a swashbuckling wanderer, chosen of Tonis, should bear little resemblance to such a narrow archetype.
This narrow archetype that doesn't fit the game is the source of the problem. Development to make the profession more interesting has been driven toward 'warrior stuff', since doubling down on the lawful good holy warrior thing makes so little sense that even devs willing to put paladins in the game as they are now wouldn't do it. 'Warrior stuff' is general enough not to cross this line, but the result is the abomination that paladins are today - semis that break all the semi rules, or squares that break all the square rules. I'm not saying they are imbalanced, I'm just saying they shatter all the fuzzy lines that have separated squares and semis for 30 years.
The solution? Hah, I don't know if there is one at this point. A massive overhaul of paladins to make their abilities unique, and conform to their Arkati of choice? That's a mountain of work though. I've said it before and I'll say it again - paladins were a mistake, and they should have just kept it as a supported path for clerics. I don't see any of these fundamental problems as realistically solvable, and since so few people play paladins, I doubt there is a satisfactory answer to the OP.
I don't think swinging a sanctified weapon is really the defining attribute of paladins in this game. Perhaps it was, once, and it still stands to reason that they should be better at it. There's still too much overlap between what a cleric and paladin are supposed to be, if not mechanically then in the minds of players. If someone took a good mutant build like "war mage" and created a new profession out of it, you'd have the same issues that we're having with the paladin. There is really no way to change a player's perception about what a profession is supposed to be. There are really only two ways to fix it: remove the player or remove the profession.
I don't see this proposal being particularly detrimental to paladins. It opens up avenues to hunting Reim and a part of OSA to characters that don't "work well" with a bless, or players that dislike it -- and some players will continue to avoid undead because they still aren't convenient to hunt. The proposal changes a (mostly) binary sanctification into a multi-step system that is also a new professional service, perhaps building on several past suggestions. And bless will still be there, for those that prefer it.
I don't see this proposal being particularly detrimental to paladins. It opens up avenues to hunting Reim and a part of OSA to characters that don't "work well" with a bless, or players that dislike it -- and some players will continue to avoid undead because they still aren't convenient to hunt. The proposal changes a (mostly) binary sanctification into a multi-step system that is also a new professional service, perhaps building on several past suggestions. And bless will still be there, for those that prefer it.
<It opens up avenues to hunting Reim and a part of OSA to characters that don't "work well" with a bless, or players that dislike it -- and some players will continue to avoid undead because they still aren't convenient to hunt. The proposal changes a (mostly) binary sanctification into a multi-step system that is also a new professional service, perhaps building on several past suggestions. And bless will still be there, for those that prefer it.>
I've been thinking about how these changes will affect my two melee characters (warrior and ranger). In the short term the ranger will continue buying pure potions and the warrior will keep Voln blessing her weapon/shield, since they're both in the Citadel and swordsmen are immune to crits.
Longer term, the warrior will likely have flares added to her shield and possibly her weapon (depending on what opportunities present themself), and will def spend her time in minos getting both sanctified up to T5. The ranger relies far more on crits to kill, so it won't matter if a bless wears off mid-hunt once she's done with the Citadel. I prolly won't do anything with her gear other then reducing the number of blades she carries on her.... once I decide between the 7x perfect razern dagger with snake flares and 7x fully unlocked energy weapon. Both will be usable to hunt undead.
Starchitin, the OG
A severed gnomish hand crawls in on its fingertips and makes a rude gesture before quickly decaying and rotting into dust. A gust of wind quickly scatters the dust.
I've been thinking about how these changes will affect my two melee characters (warrior and ranger). In the short term the ranger will continue buying pure potions and the warrior will keep Voln blessing her weapon/shield, since they're both in the Citadel and swordsmen are immune to crits.
Longer term, the warrior will likely have flares added to her shield and possibly her weapon (depending on what opportunities present themself), and will def spend her time in minos getting both sanctified up to T5. The ranger relies far more on crits to kill, so it won't matter if a bless wears off mid-hunt once she's done with the Citadel. I prolly won't do anything with her gear other then reducing the number of blades she carries on her.... once I decide between the 7x perfect razern dagger with snake flares and 7x fully unlocked energy weapon. Both will be usable to hunt undead.
Starchitin, the OG
A severed gnomish hand crawls in on its fingertips and makes a rude gesture before quickly decaying and rotting into dust. A gust of wind quickly scatters the dust.
It may be a seamless transition if the changes to paladins coming down the pipe
1. Identify them uniquely among other martial classes.
2. Allow for a dynamic and enjoyable experience.
3. Remain balanced well enough as to not leave them weak compared to other martial classes.
4. Happen before, or very shortly after the proposed bless changes.
Now Viduus did say he was bringing his DI proposal back with modifications since it now seems lackluster in light of the bonuses brought to everyone through PSM. If it gets approved to return some level of melee offensive or defensive dominance (while we may have to relearn what it means to be an Elanthia paladin), then a new identity can be birthed from it.
This is the third time in two years that I'm taking a "wait and see" patient approach because it's important to me. But the other two times, I have been disappointed.
- Dhairn
1. Identify them uniquely among other martial classes.
2. Allow for a dynamic and enjoyable experience.
3. Remain balanced well enough as to not leave them weak compared to other martial classes.
4. Happen before, or very shortly after the proposed bless changes.
Now Viduus did say he was bringing his DI proposal back with modifications since it now seems lackluster in light of the bonuses brought to everyone through PSM. If it gets approved to return some level of melee offensive or defensive dominance (while we may have to relearn what it means to be an Elanthia paladin), then a new identity can be birthed from it.
This is the third time in two years that I'm taking a "wait and see" patient approach because it's important to me. But the other two times, I have been disappointed.
- Dhairn
Love these changes, and really look forward to their implementation and release.
Just to clarify, these buffs:
>Additionally, melee/ranged weapons gain a bonus of 2 AS per tier. Runestaves gain a bonus of 2 bolt AS and 1.2 CS per tier.
only apply to attacks against undead, I assume? May want to make that explicit in the doc.
Just to clarify, these buffs:
>Additionally, melee/ranged weapons gain a bonus of 2 AS per tier. Runestaves gain a bonus of 2 bolt AS and 1.2 CS per tier.
only apply to attacks against undead, I assume? May want to make that explicit in the doc.
<I think it would be nice if Simu was consistent with the values they charge across the board. Permabless and GUB cost 300k, 500k.... +5 enchant certs were 100k.
Wouldn't it be fair to just give Permabless and GUB both a Legacy +15 AS bonus?
G>
Not sure the math works out here.
PB was 300k. GUB, for an extra 200k, provided the permabless effect, a bane (AS, weighting, flares), and a free expansion slot (that permabless occupied). Good value for nearly twice the cost. I would strenuously object against them being treated as equal. And the current proposal for legacy bonus is still about 1/3 short of meeting the benefit level of GUB over standard permabless under the old system.
Wouldn't it be fair to just give Permabless and GUB both a Legacy +15 AS bonus?
G>
Not sure the math works out here.
PB was 300k. GUB, for an extra 200k, provided the permabless effect, a bane (AS, weighting, flares), and a free expansion slot (that permabless occupied). Good value for nearly twice the cost. I would strenuously object against them being treated as equal. And the current proposal for legacy bonus is still about 1/3 short of meeting the benefit level of GUB over standard permabless under the old system.
I feel like the paladin is now underwhelmed if this changes goes into effect... specifically 1625. Like.. what is the point of bonding to a weapon if a cleric can give something else that is similar to everybody else? Yes, we get a full bond but that is useless mechanically short of learning tainted bond. The bonded weapon improves our attack strength, and a few extra points in our wisdom bonus but on the other hand the cleric bless gives + 2 AS per tier. Yes, we can choose to add spells for our weapon to hold but on the other hand there items that do the same thing for other classes. Look at the wand holding runestaves. So what makes 1625 special at this point? What are the paladins going to get to make money since you just now proposing this for clerics to make money?
I personally like bless etc just the way it is right now. It forces interaction between players. If anything, I would suggest a Bane versus a Bless and base it off who the cleric follows. Heck, maybe even let clerics just be able to craft holy wet stones to add blesses to items.
How are demons going to work? Just need an 8x weapon or do they require a full tier 5 bond or bless?
Eonake etc etc metals? What is going to make those special at this point?
Honestly this miffs me. I;m on the verge of my second 8x weapon that can hit undead but it would seem this change (if implemented) means I gotta spend even more silvers to have an offhand weapon that can hir demons and most noteably do full damage since otherwise my offhand weapon will do 25 percent less damage.
__________________________
- Kobold in Disguise Falvicar, Blade of the Night
You swing a silver-edged black veil iron katana at Sevynne!
* Sevynne drops dead at your feet!
* Sevynne just bit the dust!
I personally like bless etc just the way it is right now. It forces interaction between players. If anything, I would suggest a Bane versus a Bless and base it off who the cleric follows. Heck, maybe even let clerics just be able to craft holy wet stones to add blesses to items.
How are demons going to work? Just need an 8x weapon or do they require a full tier 5 bond or bless?
Eonake etc etc metals? What is going to make those special at this point?
Honestly this miffs me. I;m on the verge of my second 8x weapon that can hit undead but it would seem this change (if implemented) means I gotta spend even more silvers to have an offhand weapon that can hir demons and most noteably do full damage since otherwise my offhand weapon will do 25 percent less damage.
__________________________
- Kobold in Disguise Falvicar, Blade of the Night
You swing a silver-edged black veil iron katana at Sevynne!
* Sevynne drops dead at your feet!
* Sevynne just bit the dust!
While part of me screams that this demands an overhaul or scrubbing of paladins, looking at it from a third person perspective says all that really needs to change is 1625. However, being the primary paladin identifying spell, it needs to remain big and identifying. Since this bless change needs to happen for the good of the game, I'll give my thumbs up alongside everyone else... and move the idea of changes to 1625 over to the paladin folder where it belongs. One thing's for certain... making 1625 stay the way it is with the caveat of "paladins remove the negative damage modifier on T0 sanctification" is a slap in their collective faces.
Some of us were clerics prior that would rather be a cleric than a warrior (which we never were). If you are going to get rid of paladins, then let us convert back to what we were.
I dont understand what is so difficult to understand about the bless system. It;s simple. You need a bless? Good, go find a cleric. Or perhaps Thrak or whatever newbie NPC can be updated to teach the turnip farmer to seek a cleric, or get a pure potion and further teach them that a paladin can 1604 Purify the weapon prior to a cleric blessing it to get more swings. Not to mention the lore that can add more swings to it. Really, what is so difficult to understand that if you want to hit an undead that you need your weapon blessed? I agree with another statement that weapons are going to be better vs undead than living a this point if this implemented. In addition to getting practically mimicking 1625, the changes also do make it unfair for those who spent real time and money to buy duskruin tokens to get permabless, banes etc etc and those were not cheap since most were in the 500k blood scrip range. Eonake is now worthless as is practically the rest of the holy metals... what about the time spent to get such items and what about Iasha blades and their unlocks?
Overall in short: My opinion is to leave it alone since it is fine just the way it is. If anything, let clerics create a whetstone to bless weapons. The better the skill of the cleric that made it, the better the chance that the weapon will accept the bless for whatever amount of swings.
__________________________
- Kobold in Disguise Falvicar, Blade of the Night
You swing a silver-edged black veil iron katana at Sevynne!
* Sevynne drops dead at your feet!
* Sevynne just bit the dust!
I dont understand what is so difficult to understand about the bless system. It;s simple. You need a bless? Good, go find a cleric. Or perhaps Thrak or whatever newbie NPC can be updated to teach the turnip farmer to seek a cleric, or get a pure potion and further teach them that a paladin can 1604 Purify the weapon prior to a cleric blessing it to get more swings. Not to mention the lore that can add more swings to it. Really, what is so difficult to understand that if you want to hit an undead that you need your weapon blessed? I agree with another statement that weapons are going to be better vs undead than living a this point if this implemented. In addition to getting practically mimicking 1625, the changes also do make it unfair for those who spent real time and money to buy duskruin tokens to get permabless, banes etc etc and those were not cheap since most were in the 500k blood scrip range. Eonake is now worthless as is practically the rest of the holy metals... what about the time spent to get such items and what about Iasha blades and their unlocks?
Overall in short: My opinion is to leave it alone since it is fine just the way it is. If anything, let clerics create a whetstone to bless weapons. The better the skill of the cleric that made it, the better the chance that the weapon will accept the bless for whatever amount of swings.
__________________________
- Kobold in Disguise Falvicar, Blade of the Night
You swing a silver-edged black veil iron katana at Sevynne!
* Sevynne drops dead at your feet!
* Sevynne just bit the dust!
It does seem we are swinging the pendulum a bit far with the proposed changes. Here are some ideas that don't swing quite as far and preserve some uniqueness for white ora and eonake.
Corpreal undead gain 25% Damage Resistance and crit immunity against normal weapons.
Non-Corporeal undead gain 40% Damage Resistance and crit immunity against normal weapons.
White Ora will halve the damage resistance of undead.
Eonake weapons will halve the damage resistance of undead and eliminate the crit immunity.
Any Undead Bane or blessed weapon will eliminate the undead Damage Resistance and Crit Immunity entirely. Sanctified weapons in the hands of a cleric or paladin act as a blessed weapon in this regard.
A non-corporeal undead that is slain by an Eonake weapon or cleric T5 Sanctified weapon will delay its departure by an additional 10 seconds. Any sanctified weapon used by a cleric or paladin also gains this benefit.
Undead Bane weapons bypass damage resistance and crit immunity and apply existing bane bonuses.
* Recap vs. Undead *
Normal Weapons: 25% Damage Reduction vs. Corporeal / 40% Damage Reduction vs. Non-Corporeal. No Crit Chance.
White Ora Weapons: Halves Undead Damage Resistance. No Crit Chance.
Eonake Weapons: Halves Undead Damage Resistance. Eliminates Crit Immunity. Death strike adds 10 second delay to non-corporeal departure.
Cleric T1-T5 Sanctified weapon: Reduced undead crit immunity by 5% per tier (max of 25%). This reduction is applied after any material bonus from White Ora or Eonake. Additionally applies a bonus of +2 AS per Tier. T5 Death strike adds 10 second delay to non-corporeal departure.
Blessed Weapon: Bypasses Undead Damage Reduction. Bypasses crit immunity (i.e. no change, same as today).
Permablessed Weapons: Bypasses Undead Damage Reduction. Bypasses crit immunity (i.e. no change, same as today). Cleric Sanctification would still apply the +2 AS per tier vs. Undead and add the (T5) 10 second death strike delay for non-corporeal undead.
Undead Bane Weapons: Bypasses Undead Damage Reduction. Bypasses crit immunity (i.e. no change, same as today). Cleric Sanctification would still apply the +2 AS per tier vs. Undead and add the (T5) 10 second death strike delay for non-corporeal undead.
Any Sanctified weapon in the hands of a Clerics and Paladins acts as Blessed weapons (any tier) and also gains the 10 second Death Strike delay for non-corporeal undead. Both gain +3 AS vs. undead per Cleric Sanctification Tier vs. the standard +2.
-- Robert
>> A mongrel kobold points at you and yells, "Mine! Chasin!"
Corpreal undead gain 25% Damage Resistance and crit immunity against normal weapons.
Non-Corporeal undead gain 40% Damage Resistance and crit immunity against normal weapons.
White Ora will halve the damage resistance of undead.
Eonake weapons will halve the damage resistance of undead and eliminate the crit immunity.
Any Undead Bane or blessed weapon will eliminate the undead Damage Resistance and Crit Immunity entirely. Sanctified weapons in the hands of a cleric or paladin act as a blessed weapon in this regard.
A non-corporeal undead that is slain by an Eonake weapon or cleric T5 Sanctified weapon will delay its departure by an additional 10 seconds. Any sanctified weapon used by a cleric or paladin also gains this benefit.
Undead Bane weapons bypass damage resistance and crit immunity and apply existing bane bonuses.
* Recap vs. Undead *
Normal Weapons: 25% Damage Reduction vs. Corporeal / 40% Damage Reduction vs. Non-Corporeal. No Crit Chance.
White Ora Weapons: Halves Undead Damage Resistance. No Crit Chance.
Eonake Weapons: Halves Undead Damage Resistance. Eliminates Crit Immunity. Death strike adds 10 second delay to non-corporeal departure.
Cleric T1-T5 Sanctified weapon: Reduced undead crit immunity by 5% per tier (max of 25%). This reduction is applied after any material bonus from White Ora or Eonake. Additionally applies a bonus of +2 AS per Tier. T5 Death strike adds 10 second delay to non-corporeal departure.
Blessed Weapon: Bypasses Undead Damage Reduction. Bypasses crit immunity (i.e. no change, same as today).
Permablessed Weapons: Bypasses Undead Damage Reduction. Bypasses crit immunity (i.e. no change, same as today). Cleric Sanctification would still apply the +2 AS per tier vs. Undead and add the (T5) 10 second death strike delay for non-corporeal undead.
Undead Bane Weapons: Bypasses Undead Damage Reduction. Bypasses crit immunity (i.e. no change, same as today). Cleric Sanctification would still apply the +2 AS per tier vs. Undead and add the (T5) 10 second death strike delay for non-corporeal undead.
Any Sanctified weapon in the hands of a Clerics and Paladins acts as Blessed weapons (any tier) and also gains the 10 second Death Strike delay for non-corporeal undead. Both gain +3 AS vs. undead per Cleric Sanctification Tier vs. the standard +2.
-- Robert
>> A mongrel kobold points at you and yells, "Mine! Chasin!"
>>It does seem we are swinging the pendulum a bit far with the proposed changes.
Robert, thanks for putting time into a thoughtful counter-proposal. I really like all of these ideas, especially restricting the NCU-anchoring effect to 330 T5 and eonake. Simply giving it to everyone for nothing is too much, I think.
One thing though: if they do end up moving 304 to Cat C, it's all meaningless, since the only configurations people will run will be their primary uber-weapon with a temp 304, or a 330 T5 weapon. They really need to keep certain things unblessable, or at the very least have escalating duration modifiers or difficulty modifiers for 304 in my opinion, to preserve the historical uniqueness and difficulty of hunting Undead. This is an ancient, foundational part of Gemstone, and it shouldn't be cast aside just because some people want more convenience.
If any weapon can accept a 304, then Undead are easier than Living. On the other hand, if they implemented something closer to your counter-proposal (plus some kind of restrictions or escalating duration/difficulty modifiers on 304) then it would a big improvement over the existing proposal in my mind.
Robert, thanks for putting time into a thoughtful counter-proposal. I really like all of these ideas, especially restricting the NCU-anchoring effect to 330 T5 and eonake. Simply giving it to everyone for nothing is too much, I think.
One thing though: if they do end up moving 304 to Cat C, it's all meaningless, since the only configurations people will run will be their primary uber-weapon with a temp 304, or a 330 T5 weapon. They really need to keep certain things unblessable, or at the very least have escalating duration modifiers or difficulty modifiers for 304 in my opinion, to preserve the historical uniqueness and difficulty of hunting Undead. This is an ancient, foundational part of Gemstone, and it shouldn't be cast aside just because some people want more convenience.
If any weapon can accept a 304, then Undead are easier than Living. On the other hand, if they implemented something closer to your counter-proposal (plus some kind of restrictions or escalating duration/difficulty modifiers on 304) then it would a big improvement over the existing proposal in my mind.
>This is an ancient, foundational part of Gemstone, and it shouldn't be cast aside just because some people want more convenience.
This. I think we're in the massive minority, but I really feel like this game is being 'conveniencified' to death as it reshapes itself into a giant inventory management simulator for heavily invested players. Decisions are now made in that context, not the context of Gemstone the text-based RPG. I like the idea of sanctify being the cleric service, but I agree that the proposed document goes a little too far and preserves too little of the spirit of Gemstone's historical design of undead (and the process of hunting them).
This. I think we're in the massive minority, but I really feel like this game is being 'conveniencified' to death as it reshapes itself into a giant inventory management simulator for heavily invested players. Decisions are now made in that context, not the context of Gemstone the text-based RPG. I like the idea of sanctify being the cleric service, but I agree that the proposed document goes a little too far and preserves too little of the spirit of Gemstone's historical design of undead (and the process of hunting them).
It would be just swell if every mechanics change didn't cause a certain subset of players to turn into chicken little and proclaim the sky is falling.
| As I gaze over the horizon, the wind tugs at my cloak and whispers, "Adventure" in my ear. |
| A squeaky halfling nearby asks, "Why you playing with orcs heads and troll rearends?!" |
I think there's a misconception that every character and every weapon will be tier 5 sanctified, which won't be the case. Not only will this be gated by player Clerics actually playing and progressing their character each week, but a significant majority of the weapons that have permabless or greater undead bane are very high end and player cast 330 will not work on them due to the gear difficulty.
More than likely, Bless (304) will continue to work on ammo as it does now, but Sanctify (330) will only work on bows.
GameMaster Estild
| EICHERJ |
| Estild, how will this cleric bless change work for arrows/bolts? Especially for those in dupe quivers? |
More than likely, Bless (304) will continue to work on ammo as it does now, but Sanctify (330) will only work on bows.
GameMaster Estild
<I think there's a misconception that every character and every weapon will be tier 5 sanctified, which won't be the case. Not only will this be gated by player Clerics actually playing and progressing their character each week>
This is why I asked whether 304/Voln bless will work with sanctified weapons (and am still waiting for an answer). If it doesn't, then 330 will be an all or nothing proposition. Only having 1 or 2 ranks will mean your weapon is stuck having 20% to 15% damage reduction against undead with no way to mitigate it.... where if you don't bother with it, there are multiple ways to not have to deal with that penalty (304, Voln, pure potions, etc).
Also, while I'm sure not every character or weapon will be T5 sanctified.... I'm also sure that MOST of those responding in this thread will have the ability to get at least one or two weapons to T5 one way or another within a year of its release (should they desire it). Those that hunt undead regularly with melee weapons don't tend to have as many difficulty adding enhancements on those weapons cause they remove the ability to bless them.
Starchitin, the OG
A severed gnomish hand crawls in on its fingertips and makes a rude gesture before quickly decaying and rotting into dust. A gust of wind quickly scatters the dust.
This is why I asked whether 304/Voln bless will work with sanctified weapons (and am still waiting for an answer). If it doesn't, then 330 will be an all or nothing proposition. Only having 1 or 2 ranks will mean your weapon is stuck having 20% to 15% damage reduction against undead with no way to mitigate it.... where if you don't bother with it, there are multiple ways to not have to deal with that penalty (304, Voln, pure potions, etc).
Also, while I'm sure not every character or weapon will be T5 sanctified.... I'm also sure that MOST of those responding in this thread will have the ability to get at least one or two weapons to T5 one way or another within a year of its release (should they desire it). Those that hunt undead regularly with melee weapons don't tend to have as many difficulty adding enhancements on those weapons cause they remove the ability to bless them.
Starchitin, the OG
A severed gnomish hand crawls in on its fingertips and makes a rude gesture before quickly decaying and rotting into dust. A gust of wind quickly scatters the dust.
