Familiar Gate Now Tied to Elemental Mana Control

[Gan]

~~

In the past the success level of the player casting Familiar Gate improved with every level they gained, i.e. an age-based system. From now on the age-based success bonus to the spell Familiar Gate will be adjusted to reward ranks of Elemental Mana Control rather than player levels.

Wizards who single in Elemental Mana Control should see no difference in their success rate. Wizards who train in EMC multiple times per level may find their success has improved, wizards who train in Elemental Mana Control less than 1X per level may experience fewer successful gates depending on the other success factors such as wizard spell training and stat bonuses.

~~

Webwitch Croe

This message was originally posted in Wizards, Wizard Spells. To discuss the above follow the link below.

http://www.play.net/forums/messages.asp?forum=102&category=31&topic=11&message=4603 (http://www.play.net/forums/redirect.asp?URL=http://www.play.net/forums/messages.asp?forum=102&category=31&topic=11&message=4603)

[LordBacl]

Well, so much for lores.

What do they have against LEVEL actualy meaning SOMETHING, anyway?

[Latrinsorm]

with every level they gained, i.e. an age-based system.I fucking hate GMs.

This change sounds like it makes sense though.

[StrayRogue]

Well, so much for lores.



Yeah because anyone of the elemental lores would be appropriate *roll eyes*

[LordBacl]

Yeah because anyone of the elemental lores would be appropriate *roll eyes*

Well, whatever. Does EMC make more sense for 930 than lore? Yup. I was more commenting on the fact that lores were supposed to be made more useful and instead EMC was made more useful. Nilvin said recently that we should be 1x in lores and that we'd soon see why.

540 comes out and it needs....::drumroll:: EMC. Then they do this weird tweak to Familiar Gate and it needs... ::drumroll:: EMC. Lores are just as worthless as ever, and 1x in EMC makes a shit load more sense than 1x in lores, thanks in part to these recent updates.

So what's gonna happen? 940 will come out, it will have some stupid and ridiculously high lore requirement to do ALCHEMY and that'll likely be the last you hear of lore updates for wizards for years.

[Kitsun]

Wizard lore revamp hasn't been done yet. I think it was due for 2nd quarter but like a lot of other things it has been shoved back.

[Ignot]

I hate change.

[Olanan]

I hate crappy changes.

[Kuyuk]

I'd hate to be a GM, impliment something that look months to do, and have eveyone bitch about it.


Kudos to the staff.


K.

[Ignot]

Well the GM should stop telling us that lores are going to be important during these changes and then have the changes based around EMC. I keep trying to convince myself that 1x lore is the appropriate thing to do but I am starting to think otherwise....that alot of tps for spells and EMC.

[StrayRogue]

Well, whatever. Does EMC make more sense for 930 than lore? Yup. I was more commenting on the fact that lores were supposed to be made more useful and instead EMC was made more useful. Nilvin said recently that we should be 1x in lores and that we'd soon see why.



...

Did you not actually read my post? Lets try again.

The wizard lores are primarily based around the elements (fire, air, earth and water). How the fuck could they pick one and only one to affect both spells?

For starters none alone would make sense (though I could see using air lore for 540). Secondly everyone who would have trained in the alternative elemental lores would go crazy. Thirdly you couldn't tie it to any of the other lores (like Summoning) because the cost is too expensive and no wizard has any ranks in it. Fifthly, they realized their mistake in making the elemental lores based only on elements and had to find another cheap skill that every wizard should have trained in. Spells? No, they're moving away from that system. Wait a minute?? EMC?? Everyother class has a use for this skill, so now do wizards.

Get the fuck over it.

[Olanan]

I'd hate to be a GM, impliment something that look months to do, and have eveyone bitch about it.


Kudos to the staff.


K.


I understand that but just about everyone on the Officials boo'd it.

Like 1040.

Like 1140.

[StrayRogue]

People boo'd 1140? I think not.

[Olanan]

I thought they did.

...I did. :(

[Latrinsorm]

I'd hate to be a GM, impliment something that look months to do...

Do you seriously think it took months (even ONE month!!) to change an existing spell from level-based to skill-based?

Any GM who makes the equation between age and level deserves nothing but scorn for a period of no less than 1 (one) week.

[Kitsun]

I understand that but just about everyone on the Officials boo'd it.

Like 1040.

Like 1140.

If you actually go back to that time period of posts and look at all the account names, you'll realize it was mostly one or two people bitching a lot.

[Latrinsorm]

I don't remember anyone liking 1040. I do think a few people liked the general concept, just not the %s (which were subsequently strongly uptweaked).

[LordBacl]

...

Did you not actually read my post?



Nope! I just looked at your avatar, drooled, hit reply, and then slammed my fist on the keyboard and excalimed, "Oh man, that's hot!" The content of my post was a result of that reaction. What did it say? Wait, what did you say to start with...let me go double check...oh there's that hot chick with the SNES in her nethers again...what was I doing?



...
Get the fuck over it.

I'm over it! I'm over it! I just like to snark. It reduces my stress by transfering it onto others.

[StrayRogue]

Heheh, thats probably the best reply I've read in ages.

[Meges]

Since the release of this change, I've yet to fail a cast of Familiar Gate. I've likely cast the spell around 30 times. EMC doesn't seem to carry heavy weighting concerning the success of a cast. I have 30 ranks of EMC. 60 Wizard spell ranks. All stats are 100 except for a 91 in CON and an 85 in INF. Half-elf.


Meges