A pretty good summary of my thoughts on the matter.
About That Enchanting Suggestion
Moderators: Forum Moderators, Active DMs, Contributors
-
- Project Lead
- Posts: 1445
- Joined: Fri Sep 12, 2014 2:02 am
Re: About That Enchanting Suggestion
Dinosaur Space Program is my working partner on Arelith-related projects. If my inbox is full or I take a while to get back to you, feel free to PM them questions or concerns.
-
- Posts: 901
- Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2014 9:06 am
- Location: Australia
Re: About That Enchanting Suggestion
I have a WM, too. I'm not the one being killed, but that doesn't mean I can't put in my opinion. The mage I play did not take skill dump classes and that does not make it a 'bad build' it makes it the correct build for what I want to roleplay. A wizard. NOT a bard-wizard or anything else, just a wizard. That is the game I am playing, a roleplaying game, and the playstyle that should be catered to, not moba-style balance around builds that do not RP their classes or stats.Sockss wrote: ↑Thu Jul 05, 2018 10:41 amEnchantment should be buffed, it's weak.
Removing clarity effectiveness would buff enchantment but in a profoundly unhealthy way.
As it is, you can play around clarity. There's a good middle ground in that a will save is good to have, but if you don't, it doesn't invalidate you completely against any caster. (and therefore only allowing a very narrow range of classes to be viable.)
Sure it is possible to have balanced around not being able to access immunities but it would take a huge amount of time and you'd, eventually, only end up back in a very similar spot as to where we're standing now.
It does seem at times that we play very different games. WM's killing you in a round (etc) is symptomatic of you having a bad build, being extremely unlucky or playing very poorly. Even being kd'd by something is symptomatic of that.
It's important to realise that because of the d20 system things are largely balanced around averages, so personal experience is not the best measure of class competency. It's also important to realise that because this is a game, people might play better than you, which is something that can't be accounted for (we don't have the old RTS handicap buttons).
The goal of balancing is to make as many things viable as possible. Enchantment can be made viable without destroying the viability of that vast majority of classes,, so that would be the best way to go.
This game has a low skill ceiling. If you are playing this game thinking it is your skills alone that get you by and not your build/gear you are most often mistaken. This is not a difficult game. This is among the easiest of games. Cheesing and powerbuilding does not = skill. It = unbalance.
I think at this time it's best we agree that we have very different ideas of what a roleplaying server should be, and where we'd like Arelith to head.
Characters: Xun'sali (ACTIVE), Tianae Tymeaneldth (Rolled), Sylali (Rolled), Magpie (Rolled), Ker'uanna Tymeaneldth (Rolled), Lepota Poklona (Rolled), Andariel Bloodletter (Shelved), Tahl'tril Cyredrretyn (Rolled), L'omithiel (Shelved).
Re: About That Enchanting Suggestion
It is categorically a bad build, in terms of mechanics.
Yes nwn does have a very low skill ceiling, but player skill still has impact.
Yes nwn does have a very low skill ceiling, but player skill still has impact.
Thankfully this team is no longer being used.
Sockss#5567 for nwn mechanics questions.
Sockss#5567 for nwn mechanics questions.
-
- Posts: 1860
- Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2014 4:44 pm
Re: About That Enchanting Suggestion
Multiclassing is not 'cheesing' or 'powerbuilding'. It's one of the most basic parts of the system. D&D 3.0 was designed (and balanced* around) modularity, for better or worse.
Having played more than a dozen roleplay servers over the course of many years, one thing I've learned is that there are a lot of roleplay styles, and none of them are really wrong, per se. (Though I may vehemently turn my nose up at some.)
However, it seems yours stands in stark contrast with Arelith's stated intent, which is also to function as a game. Rather than lobby for a change in Arelith's core philosophy (which clearly isn't forthcoming), perhaps it may be more prudent either to adapt or to find a server better-suited to your tastes?
(* Yes, we're all aware 3.0 isn't that well-balanced. That's not the point.)
ETA: I realize my tone may tone may seem harsh, and I certainly do not intend it be. I merely feel that it's pointless to argue against something that clearly isn't going to change.
Having played more than a dozen roleplay servers over the course of many years, one thing I've learned is that there are a lot of roleplay styles, and none of them are really wrong, per se. (Though I may vehemently turn my nose up at some.)
However, it seems yours stands in stark contrast with Arelith's stated intent, which is also to function as a game. Rather than lobby for a change in Arelith's core philosophy (which clearly isn't forthcoming), perhaps it may be more prudent either to adapt or to find a server better-suited to your tastes?
(* Yes, we're all aware 3.0 isn't that well-balanced. That's not the point.)
ETA: I realize my tone may tone may seem harsh, and I certainly do not intend it be. I merely feel that it's pointless to argue against something that clearly isn't going to change.
Last edited by Peppermint on Thu Jul 05, 2018 1:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 901
- Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2014 9:06 am
- Location: Australia
Re: About That Enchanting Suggestion
I understand and agree multiclassing is the most basic part of this edition, however I do not agree it works as well in NWN as it does in the real game. I do consider it cheesing when those aspects of the character aren't roleplayed in any way whatsoever. It was taken entirely for mechanical benefit, and that is also why it's powerbuilding. That's just my opinion from my perspective, but I understand how it would seem backwards from yours and I respect that.Peppermint wrote: ↑Thu Jul 05, 2018 1:12 pmMulticlassing is not 'cheesing' or 'powerbuilding'. It's one of the most basic parts of the system. D&D 3.0 was designed (and balanced* around) modularity, for better or worse.
Having played more than a dozen roleplay servers over the course of many years, one thing I've learned is that there are a lot of roleplay styles, and none of them are really wrong, per se. (Though I may vehemently turn my nose up at some.)
However, it seems yours stands in stark contrast with Arelith's stated intent, which is also to function as a game. Rather than lobby for a change in Arelith's core philosophy (which clearly isn't forthcoming), perhaps it may be more prudent either to adapt or to find a server better-suited to your tastes?
(* Yes, we're all aware 3.0 isn't that well-balanced. That's not the point.)
I can and do adapt and am happy to play here but it won't stop me from voicing my opinions. As far as I know, I'm allowed to do that. I'm allowed to give ideas that I honestly believe will improve the server, regardless of whether you like them or not. I'd like to see the quality of RP improve here.
Finding another server better-suited to my tastes may be sound advice. I'll take it. If anyone could suggest a server, I would gladly try it out. These servers used to exist, but I don't know of any that still do.
Last edited by Dr_Hazard89 on Thu Jul 05, 2018 1:26 pm, edited 3 times in total.
Characters: Xun'sali (ACTIVE), Tianae Tymeaneldth (Rolled), Sylali (Rolled), Magpie (Rolled), Ker'uanna Tymeaneldth (Rolled), Lepota Poklona (Rolled), Andariel Bloodletter (Shelved), Tahl'tril Cyredrretyn (Rolled), L'omithiel (Shelved).
Re: About That Enchanting Suggestion
Can't we really like Arelith and it be our favourite server, but also disagree with design choices and state our opinion?
There's been a lot of, 'Yeah if you don't like it, go elsewhere' and I don't think that's healthy for the community.
There's been a lot of, 'Yeah if you don't like it, go elsewhere' and I don't think that's healthy for the community.
-
- Posts: 1310
- Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2015 3:48 am
Re: About That Enchanting Suggestion
There are an abundance of RP media where “the rp is all that matters”. D&D and NWN are not among them. D&D and its derivative systems were, before they became media for RP, were games, and grew into support of roleplay functions. NWN and Arelith in particular remain faithful in spirit to this principle. Yes, we care a lot about the roleplay, yes, we want a server where roleplay is fostered and encouraged. But we’re still playing a game.
Games involve rules, and skillful understanding and application of those rules is rewarded. One of 3.x D&D’s core rules is multiclassing, and the rewards for doing it are pretty significant. That’s not to say that you can’t pure class if you want to, but let’s not pretend that the spirit of a D&D experience is undermined by playing it as a game.
Once we’ve admitted that we’re playing a game, why not also try to balance it?
Games involve rules, and skillful understanding and application of those rules is rewarded. One of 3.x D&D’s core rules is multiclassing, and the rewards for doing it are pretty significant. That’s not to say that you can’t pure class if you want to, but let’s not pretend that the spirit of a D&D experience is undermined by playing it as a game.
Once we’ve admitted that we’re playing a game, why not also try to balance it?
-
- Project Lead
- Posts: 1445
- Joined: Fri Sep 12, 2014 2:02 am
Re: About That Enchanting Suggestion
From personal observation, I have yet to find a positive correlation between pure-class builds and quality of roleplay. Your experiences may differ.
Either way, it's not a healthy state of mind to assume that one's fellow players are incapable of roleplaying the different aspects of their character sheet, or that they are powergamers because their characters happen to be multi-faceted adventurers in the spirit of pen-and-paper 3rd ed.
Either way, it's not a healthy state of mind to assume that one's fellow players are incapable of roleplaying the different aspects of their character sheet, or that they are powergamers because their characters happen to be multi-faceted adventurers in the spirit of pen-and-paper 3rd ed.
Dinosaur Space Program is my working partner on Arelith-related projects. If my inbox is full or I take a while to get back to you, feel free to PM them questions or concerns.
-
- Posts: 901
- Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2014 9:06 am
- Location: Australia
Re: About That Enchanting Suggestion
I disagree. D&D has always been the perfect media for me and NWN has satisfied that itch for me since the game was launched, some servers more than others. The storytelling has always come first and this is news to me. The storytelling has improved with editions (let's ignore 4th).Scurvy Cur wrote: ↑Thu Jul 05, 2018 1:27 pmThere are an abundance of RP media where “the rp is all that matters”. D&D and NWN are not among them. D&D and its derivative systems were, before they became media for RP, were games, and grew into support of roleplay functions. NWN and Arelith in particular remain faithful in spirit to this principle. Yes, we care a lot about the roleplay, yes, we want a server where roleplay is fostered and encouraged. But we’re still playing a game.
Games involve rules, and skillful understanding and application of those rules is rewarded. One of 3.x D&D’s core rules is multiclassing, and the rewards for doing it are pretty significant. That’s not to say that you can’t pure class if you want to, but let’s not pretend that the spirit of a D&D experience is undermined by playing it as a game.
Once we’ve admitted that we’re playing a game, why not also try to balance it?
If people feel that strongly about it, that the response to ideas is 'Just go somewhere else'. Maybe I should. Where to go? As I said, those servers haven't existed for many years, but I recall they pulled it off just fine at the time.
I don't think it's healthy or constructive to dismiss me like that by suggesting I leave, but I won't argue it if you can tell me what server to try. I won't accept that NWN (and especially D&D) is not the right media. NWN has worked just fine for me, and D&D is exactly what I mean to play.
Characters: Xun'sali (ACTIVE), Tianae Tymeaneldth (Rolled), Sylali (Rolled), Magpie (Rolled), Ker'uanna Tymeaneldth (Rolled), Lepota Poklona (Rolled), Andariel Bloodletter (Shelved), Tahl'tril Cyredrretyn (Rolled), L'omithiel (Shelved).
-
- Posts: 901
- Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2014 9:06 am
- Location: Australia
Re: About That Enchanting Suggestion
I never spoke in absolutes. Obviously not everyone. I think your statement is very hard to defend though, if you see how people speak OOCly about their characters and others.yellowcateyes wrote: ↑Thu Jul 05, 2018 1:31 pmFrom personal observation, I have yet to find a positive correlation between pure-class builds and quality of roleplay. Your experiences may differ.
Either way, it's not a healthy state of mind to assume that one's fellow players are incapable of roleplaying the different aspects of their character sheet, or that they are powergamers because their characters happen to be multi-faceted adventurers in the spirit of pen-and-paper 3rd ed.
Characters: Xun'sali (ACTIVE), Tianae Tymeaneldth (Rolled), Sylali (Rolled), Magpie (Rolled), Ker'uanna Tymeaneldth (Rolled), Lepota Poklona (Rolled), Andariel Bloodletter (Shelved), Tahl'tril Cyredrretyn (Rolled), L'omithiel (Shelved).
-
- Emeritus Admin
- Posts: 1010
- Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2014 9:24 am
- Location: 51° 38′ NB, 4° 53′ OL
Re: About That Enchanting Suggestion
Can we get back on topic here? Thanks.
-
- Posts: 901
- Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2014 9:06 am
- Location: Australia
Re: About That Enchanting Suggestion
To get things a little bit back on topic. I did like the idea about a permanent dominate, but I'd hate to see all the named mobs/same mobs always being dragged about. Could get very awkward after a while. "Bring some princess Abawhatsherfaces, we're going to fight the gnolls."..
Characters: Xun'sali (ACTIVE), Tianae Tymeaneldth (Rolled), Sylali (Rolled), Magpie (Rolled), Ker'uanna Tymeaneldth (Rolled), Lepota Poklona (Rolled), Andariel Bloodletter (Shelved), Tahl'tril Cyredrretyn (Rolled), L'omithiel (Shelved).
Re: About That Enchanting Suggestion
I'm here because in ten years I've never found another roleplaying setting with such a diverse population.
Neverwinter Nights is... It's not that good a game. I'm not here for the game. It's okay. I liked the OC [Bad taste, right?] but it's aged terribly badly. I don't come here to game. I come here to tell stories, and what the 'Game' aspect of it does it provide some numerical values for conflict resoultion, and an NPC challenge so people can work together, rather than just against each other.
I've been other places, on other media. Some were better experiences, but they were either too small, or dependent on media platforms that ultimately collapsed, where as NWN manages to maintain stable server hosting for a decade. I geninuely think we have the best storytelling persistant world in the entire world, and I really enjoy being a part of that.
Anyway, this is getting hugely off topic. But telling people to go somewhere else is an excellent way to kill a community. I've disagreed sharply with several posters in this thread, and we have very different views, but I don't want you to leave, because that would diminish our shared community.
Neverwinter Nights is... It's not that good a game. I'm not here for the game. It's okay. I liked the OC [Bad taste, right?] but it's aged terribly badly. I don't come here to game. I come here to tell stories, and what the 'Game' aspect of it does it provide some numerical values for conflict resoultion, and an NPC challenge so people can work together, rather than just against each other.
I've been other places, on other media. Some were better experiences, but they were either too small, or dependent on media platforms that ultimately collapsed, where as NWN manages to maintain stable server hosting for a decade. I geninuely think we have the best storytelling persistant world in the entire world, and I really enjoy being a part of that.
Anyway, this is getting hugely off topic. But telling people to go somewhere else is an excellent way to kill a community. I've disagreed sharply with several posters in this thread, and we have very different views, but I don't want you to leave, because that would diminish our shared community.
-
- Project Lead
- Posts: 1445
- Joined: Fri Sep 12, 2014 2:02 am
Re: About That Enchanting Suggestion
Which statement?Dr_Hazard89 wrote: ↑Thu Jul 05, 2018 1:37 pmI never spoke in absolutes. Obviously not everyone. I think your statement is very hard to defend though, if you see how people speak OOCly about their characters and others.
That I personally haven't seen a correlation between character sheet levels and quality of roleplay? That one shouldn't assume that other players can't roleplay the different aspects of their character sheets? Or that one shouldn't assume that another player is powergaming because they have multiple classes on their character sheets?
Back on topic:
This has been a long and convoluted thread, but some points continue to crop up in regard to the flaws with the current system:
- Going by the canon of D&D spell schools and their thematic roles, including how they were translated into NWN mechanics, adding to or modifying items is not a good fit for the school of Enchantment.
- The Enchantment school, in the context of Arelith's systems, is an underwhelming pick as a school to focus on. It is only attractive in that it is the gateway to end-game gearing for all characters - wizard or otherwise.
- Gating item progression behind a small subset of characters is particularly harsh on casual players and lone wolf characters. Many friend groups and cliques have a 'pocket enchanter' they can pull out on request, and the present system rewards OOC coordination and connections.
There's a fair bit of argument about whether any or all of the above are really problems, and whether a solution is actually needed. But if a solution is presented, it would ideally address all the issues.
Dinosaur Space Program is my working partner on Arelith-related projects. If my inbox is full or I take a while to get back to you, feel free to PM them questions or concerns.
-
- Posts: 901
- Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2014 9:06 am
- Location: Australia
Re: About That Enchanting Suggestion
1.yellowcateyes wrote: ↑Thu Jul 05, 2018 1:59 pmWhich statement?Dr_Hazard89 wrote: ↑Thu Jul 05, 2018 1:37 pmI never spoke in absolutes. Obviously not everyone. I think your statement is very hard to defend though, if you see how people speak OOCly about their characters and others.
That one shouldn't assume that other players can't roleplay the different aspects of their character sheets? Or that one shouldn't assume that another player is powergaming because they have multiple classes on their character sheets?
Back on topic:
This has been a long and convoluted thread, but some points continue to crop up in regard to the flaws with the current system:There is also the issue of implementation - the extent to which a 'fix' would disrupt established characters and lead to requests for grandfathering and/or rebuilds.
- Going by the canon of D&D spell schools and their thematic roles, including how they were translated into NWN mechanics, adding to or modifying items is not a good fit for the school of Enchantment.
- The Enchantment school, in the context of Arelith's systems, is an underwhelming pick as a school to focus on. It is only attractive in that it is the gateway to end-game gearing for all characters - wizard or otherwise.
- Gating item progression behind a small subset of characters is particularly harsh on casual players and lone wolf characters. Many friend groups and cliques have a 'pocket enchanter' they can pull out on request, and the present system rewards OOC coordination and connections.
There's a fair bit of argument about whether any or all of the above are really problems, and whether a solution is actually needed. But if a solution is presented, it would ideally address all the issues.
That I shouldn't assume that another player is powergaming. I won't start a whole list, but I know who is powergaming because they tell me so themselves. I know who isn't RPing certain aspects of their character and just took them for mechanical benefit, because they tell me so. I am not implying multiclassing is powergaming, but that it can be used to powergame. Multiclassing I agree is a staple.
2.
I agree with your first two points fully, and your third partially. I like there being specialized item creators, but I also believe the current system rewards OOC coordination and connections (unfortunately).
Characters: Xun'sali (ACTIVE), Tianae Tymeaneldth (Rolled), Sylali (Rolled), Magpie (Rolled), Ker'uanna Tymeaneldth (Rolled), Lepota Poklona (Rolled), Andariel Bloodletter (Shelved), Tahl'tril Cyredrretyn (Rolled), L'omithiel (Shelved).
-
- Arelith Platinum Supporter
- Posts: 1496
- Joined: Mon May 14, 2018 9:14 am
- Location: Mechanics Dungeon
Re: About That Enchanting Suggestion
Just wanted to chip in on this part here before going back to doing more spreadsheets for ranged stuff.Dr_Hazard89 wrote: ↑Thu Jul 05, 2018 2:06 pm... I like there being specialized item creators, but I also believe the current system rewards OOC coordination and connections (unfortunately).yellowcateyes wrote: ↑Thu Jul 05, 2018 1:59 pm
- Gating item progression behind a small subset of characters is particularly harsh on casual players and lone wolf characters. Many friend groups and cliques have a 'pocket enchanter' they can pull out on request, and the present system rewards OOC coordination and connections.
With the recent Ranger (archer path) update, archers can now take different weapon foci feats to generate different bundles of ammunition (launcher types only). At the same time, obtaining those bundles via crafting has been made easier for players, as well.
This is great, all of a sudden, my characters can both mechanically and RP-wise act similarly to a quartermaster in the military. No longer will my characters be barred behind "Oh I only do arrows and make the essence for them, not bolts nor bullets, sorry!" because of the old archer path only making arrow bundles. The options are there if players are willing to make the sacrifice and utilize their feats; this small part of the update on archer path may have been overlooked by most, but it certainly was in the right direction for both casual and crafting players (Speaking for myself, I guess) in my opinion.
Make enchanting equipment easier somehow, but still reward those who decide to specialize in certain things. I think I read similar sentiment somewhere buried in the posts of this thread.
Tried to find them, but then found one of Baron Saturday's suggestion:
I really think this would be in the right direction for the current system. Dragon Age's "Enchantment? Enchantment!" may have stuck in my head, but this suggestion would probably allow enchantment foci to be freed up for more than just a crafting bonus that wasn't even lore-friendly. Thus allowing enchantment foci to be tuned to something similar to their intended nature.Baron Saturday wrote: ↑Sat Jun 30, 2018 9:30 pmHow do people (on both sides) feel about moving the basin bonuses to scribe scroll/brew potion/craft wand? Having one of those feats gives the SF bonus, two gives the GSF bonus, and all three gives the ESF bonus. This opens up full basin bonuses to all caster classes without requiring otherwise useless feats, but at the same time restricts the bonuses to those willing to invest feats in them, and frees up Enchantment foci to have their own thing. It also makes sense that people practiced in creating magical items... would be better at creating magical items.
As for grandfathering, well, that's for the folks here to figure it out, I'm not sure where I stand on that.
-
- Arelith Silver Supporter
- Posts: 264
- Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2018 8:54 am
- Location: UK
Re: About That Enchanting Suggestion
To add to those points I would say the inconsistency is a little irksome:
Implosion and KD spam are "fine" as is. Despite representing some of the same issues. And with clarity as is, then over-incentivises Discipline, constitution and fortitude, whilst removing a fairly large chunk of the "cost" of a wisdom dump stat.
Conceptually, roleplay wise, I don't find it makes a great deal of sense for the entire population of Arelith to have minimum Con 14 and max discipline. I am told often that builds that do not include such things are by default "bad".
I've been RPing long enough to be confident I can represent pretty much anything on a character sheet if I need to. Want to justify a character dancing a naked jig in the middle of an orc camp? Give me time I can come up with some RP justify it. Just because it -can- be does not necessarily mean it should be.
So sure, people can justify a cookie-cutter build, conceptualise discipline 60 as "just being really good at not falling over" rather than the rigorous physical training it is supposed to represent. And all power to them if they wish to, personally I'd rather see and play something new and interesting.
The current meta is what it is, and I don't expect it to change. But it is that because of the choices made over "what kind of 1 round kill is OK".
Implosion and KD spam are "fine" as is. Despite representing some of the same issues. And with clarity as is, then over-incentivises Discipline, constitution and fortitude, whilst removing a fairly large chunk of the "cost" of a wisdom dump stat.
Conceptually, roleplay wise, I don't find it makes a great deal of sense for the entire population of Arelith to have minimum Con 14 and max discipline. I am told often that builds that do not include such things are by default "bad".
I've been RPing long enough to be confident I can represent pretty much anything on a character sheet if I need to. Want to justify a character dancing a naked jig in the middle of an orc camp? Give me time I can come up with some RP justify it. Just because it -can- be does not necessarily mean it should be.
So sure, people can justify a cookie-cutter build, conceptualise discipline 60 as "just being really good at not falling over" rather than the rigorous physical training it is supposed to represent. And all power to them if they wish to, personally I'd rather see and play something new and interesting.
The current meta is what it is, and I don't expect it to change. But it is that because of the choices made over "what kind of 1 round kill is OK".
Characters: Izzy, short for Isabel. Shaena Ash.
Re: About That Enchanting Suggestion
OP's suggestion rocks. I'm signing the petition.
Free the basin! Power to the people!
Free the basin! Power to the people!
Re: About That Enchanting Suggestion
I think a fix that addresses all of these issues would be to allow that spell focuses in enchantment confer additional benefits to item crafting. Maybe make it so that only enchanters can get a full 100%, while other players can get maybe 85% or so. Or make it so that enchanters can add additional properties, or only certain properties. That way, people who have already taken focuses in enchantment will not feel that their feat investment has been wasted.yellowcateyes wrote: ↑Thu Jul 05, 2018 1:59 pmWhich statement?Dr_Hazard89 wrote: ↑Thu Jul 05, 2018 1:37 pmI never spoke in absolutes. Obviously not everyone. I think your statement is very hard to defend though, if you see how people speak OOCly about their characters and others.
That I personally haven't seen a correlation between character sheet levels and quality of roleplay? That one shouldn't assume that other players can't roleplay the different aspects of their character sheets? Or that one shouldn't assume that another player is powergaming because they have multiple classes on their character sheets?
Back on topic:
This has been a long and convoluted thread, but some points continue to crop up in regard to the flaws with the current system:There is also the issue of implementation - the extent to which a 'fix' would disrupt established characters and lead to requests for grandfathering and/or rebuilds.
- Going by the canon of D&D spell schools and their thematic roles, including how they were translated into NWN mechanics, adding to or modifying items is not a good fit for the school of Enchantment.
- The Enchantment school, in the context of Arelith's systems, is an underwhelming pick as a school to focus on. It is only attractive in that it is the gateway to end-game gearing for all characters - wizard or otherwise.
- Gating item progression behind a small subset of characters is particularly harsh on casual players and lone wolf characters. Many friend groups and cliques have a 'pocket enchanter' they can pull out on request, and the present system rewards OOC coordination and connections.
There's a fair bit of argument about whether any or all of the above are really problems, and whether a solution is actually needed. But if a solution is presented, it would ideally address all the issues.
-
- Posts: 1190
- Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2015 6:35 am
Re: About That Enchanting Suggestion
Mitigate claritys effectiveness against esf enchanters. But don't totally nuke it, and don't make it breach able.
-
- Arelith Silver Supporter
- Posts: 1584
- Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2015 8:43 pm
Re: About That Enchanting Suggestion
But invalidating half the casters with a change in Enchantment foci wouldn't be problematic? I'm genuinely curious as to why some classes are getting more careful treatment than others.Peppermint wrote: ↑Thu Jul 05, 2018 9:11 amI mean, if you want to invalidate half the classes in a carefully curated environment that's finally nearly balanced, sure. That could be considered a 'good' thing.
Re: About That Enchanting Suggestion
In my suggestion and some of what I regurgitated:
I don't think Arelith's system needs to change in how it is accomplished, merely the how and the who.
The current system favors basically wizards to do it.
I want to see the enchantment system expanded in the who and the how.
I don't think the wheel needs to be reinvented.
HOWEVER.
The Enchantment school also (and I say this even outside of the change to enchantment of items) also needs a new cookie. It'd be a two for one special.
Enchantment doesn't really have an appropriate cookie and I don't think the enchanting of items needs to move to a new school.
I don't think Arelith's system needs to change in how it is accomplished, merely the how and the who.
The current system favors basically wizards to do it.
I want to see the enchantment system expanded in the who and the how.
I don't think the wheel needs to be reinvented.
HOWEVER.
The Enchantment school also (and I say this even outside of the change to enchantment of items) also needs a new cookie. It'd be a two for one special.
Enchantment doesn't really have an appropriate cookie and I don't think the enchanting of items needs to move to a new school.
-
- Arelith Silver Supporter
- Posts: 1584
- Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2015 8:43 pm
Re: About That Enchanting Suggestion
If we gave Conjuration portals, and we gave Transmutation enchantment basin powers, then we'd have to not only get Enchantment something, but every other School would need something as well to be on par with how powerful Conjuration would become.
Conjuration already IS arguably the most powerful School to specialize in; making it more powerful would require something to make up for the lack of power in the other schools. And that would make wizards (and also sorcerers) all the more powerful.
Leaving everything as it is now, however, is the easiest way to let things stay somewhat balanced. If you change them, they'll become far more unbalanced.
Conjuration already IS arguably the most powerful School to specialize in; making it more powerful would require something to make up for the lack of power in the other schools. And that would make wizards (and also sorcerers) all the more powerful.
Leaving everything as it is now, however, is the easiest way to let things stay somewhat balanced. If you change them, they'll become far more unbalanced.
Re: About That Enchanting Suggestion
Yeah conjuration already is almost unquestionably the strongest school because of utility alone. Transmutation is actually finally in a vaguely good spot. Nerfing it because they moved teleporation from transmutation to conjuration with the move from 3.0 to 3.5 seems silly.
UilliamNebel wrote: ↑Wed Feb 12, 2020 10:24 pmYou're right. Participating in the forums was a mistake. Won't do this again.
Anime Sword Fighter wrote: I have seen far too many miniskirt anime slave girls.
Re: About That Enchanting Suggestion
Give enchantment a RP benefit, like have been mentioned earlier.
Raw ideas:
- Set up a temporary mind link with another willing player's mind, so you can exchange information for a short time over distance in an IC way.
- Spy on another player, in a different way than scry. The enchanter dips into the mind of the target, hearing what they hear and say, and/or read off their location.
- Be able to enchant NPC's to get around barriers like race/citizen requirements (this might break too many things though).
- Get better prices from vendors.
There are a lot of things that can boost the coolness of enchantment without having to rock the balance of pvp and pve.
And please don't improve dominate duration, no need to encourage a game play where you have to go fish a monster from a precompiled list before you can start your adventure.
Raw ideas:
- Set up a temporary mind link with another willing player's mind, so you can exchange information for a short time over distance in an IC way.
- Spy on another player, in a different way than scry. The enchanter dips into the mind of the target, hearing what they hear and say, and/or read off their location.
- Be able to enchant NPC's to get around barriers like race/citizen requirements (this might break too many things though).
- Get better prices from vendors.
There are a lot of things that can boost the coolness of enchantment without having to rock the balance of pvp and pve.
And please don't improve dominate duration, no need to encourage a game play where you have to go fish a monster from a precompiled list before you can start your adventure.