Random (official) GM posts [Archive] - Page 2 - The Gemstone IV Players' Corner

DoctorUnne

04-07-2010, 01:22 PM

So, question to you CMAN people, is it worth it to train in cunning defense? Will it add enough so that you will gain significant protection against a CMAN you cannot train in?

In my opinion, as a square, no. But that's more due to the opportunity cost of my CMAN points.

When you get maneuevered with something you don't know, what is the success margin, i.e. difference between the roll and the end result, assuming like level? As a pure, probably around 100, if not more. Meaning the only way the maneuver will not be successful is on an open roll.

Mastering this allows you to subtract 15 from that success margin. At most, you'll be 15% less likely to be maneuvered. In many cases it probably won't be that much if your margin was over 100 to begin with. It will reduce the severity when you do get hit, but what does that mean in practice? I'm not familiar with all the CMANs, but usually I would say 1-2 RT or 1 crit rank or a small amount of damage.

So is that worth it? For a pure who doesn't have many other options, probably. For a square who has a lot of other options and isn't as bothered by maneuvers, not in my opinion. It's far from the worst option we have, but I don't see it as a screaming buy.

DoctorUnne

04-07-2010, 01:26 PM

As an aside, based on the description of the CMAN you can infer that each CMAN rank adds 15 to your CML success roll, or 75 for mastery. Assuming I'm right and you can extrapolate like that, this is helpful mechanical information which we didn't have before.

Fallen

04-18-2010, 08:22 AM

Reply
>Will the affects of the cube help the hidden roll of a warcry?

No, just CMAN rolls.

Coase
*
.

Fallen

04-22-2010, 11:44 AM

This is in response Gendeg's, "I quit the boards speech", which is too long to post.

>>Future development plans go entirely undisclosed to the point where (for example) we don't even know if the new unarmed combat system will be monk-only, or general use.

This has been stated multiple times at Simucon and was repeated on the boards - anyone can use the armed combat system. Monks will just be the best at it because of higher successes and more options.

>>However, a recent pair of comments from Oscuro in a rogue development discussion -- I won't quote them here out of context

I don't know what the pair of comments are, but I'll paraphrase and say that I said it's unofficial dev policy to not post details about things we don't have approval for yet simply because we don't want players then considering it a promise, when it turns out it doesn't get the rubber stamp. How this isn't reasonable is beyond me.

>>I think I managed to earn the simultaneous enmity of Sirina, Ildran, and Oscuro; something which I regret.

I don't think you've earned our enmity. I know I've certainly formulated an opinion of your posting style - that you consider yourself infallible and when presented with anything your disagree with or are skeptical about can be coarse and rude about it, but you do have valuable input and quality ideas on occasion and I would prefer you post them than not.

>>On the positive side, a few of my suggestions have led directly to some mechanics changes over the past several months.

>>I -- and basically any player without a backchannel connection to a dev GM -- no longer have a significant impact on the mechanical development of the game,

First, read those two sentences again to yourself. That's right, they're contradictions. You say yourself that you've had suggestions lead to mechanics changes but that players can't have suggestions lead to mechanics changes. Huh? What exactly is the complaint then? That you can't vote by popular demand balancing details of the game? There are so many background aspects that players don't and can't know that it doesn't translate properly to let them be able to choose things. And game development is not a democracy. However, the majority of things we implement in the game ABSOLUTELY come from player suggestions.

Off the top of my head, here are some things players suggested on the boards that got implemented:
1) ANALYZE verb saying if an item can be lightened or deepened.
2) EXP verb displaying if you have an RPA available
3) Changing 1750 so it adds to the duration to the spell you can cast with it just like a scroll/magic item would.
4) In QC is an addition to INVENTORY FULL that displays if an item is marked to be unsellable or not.
5) The Cunning Defense CMAN
6) Changing Combat Movement and Combat Focus to be passive (YOUR suggestion, but we added our own dev touch to it by not taking the stamina cost off the top).
7) Evade Mastery was from player requests.

The list goes on.

A recent situation where players had a significant impact on development...
Estild and I came up with a spell idea, Crusade that was to take up the current Divine Wrath slot and we'd move DW to 335 and make it stronger. We're still planning on doing the latter (with some additional suggestions to details that players made), but we're reconsidering what to put in 319 since there was a lot of disagreement to the usefulness of Crusade for Clerics. So, even though we had approval for Crusade, we scrapped the idea b/c players didn't like it. This is a direct counterexample to your claim.

Also, I posted the details about Divert before I coded it. I listened to player input - most things were positive, so I went forward and coded it. Now it's in QC. This is not the process we take with everything, but when we're flexible on an idea, then we most certainly want to hear what players have to say before we code something. But we always want to hear what players say after we code it; we may be less flexible then, like we wouldn't scrap the idea entirely, but some details are probably open to changing.

>>and nor can I (we?) garner answers to even simple queries in the majority of cases.

Many instances of questions going unanswered is that the people reading them don't know and it's not a simple look up. Some things we're not at liberty to mention yet, either. And frankly, we're not going to answer every query because we have a limited amount of time to dedicate to the game and many of us would like to spend that time actually coding stuff for use. That said, I feel that for things under my jurisdiction, I've been good about answering questions or giving reasons why I wouldn't.

>>This is a statement which I'm sure a number of staff members would be quick to refute, but I feel that it is accurate.

Nice way to try to prove your point. "Staff does it wrong and if they disagree and try to say way, then they're just proving they're wrong!"

I honestly think your departure from the boards is just because not all of your ideas were embraced by me and the Rogue community and that upsets you. But I think it's ignorant to think that they're not considered at all - especially since I said that I liked some of them. I think you're just upset that you're disagreed with and this is an easy way out.

Take a break for a few days, then come on back with your ideas. You may not realize they're valued, but they're always read and they're always considered.

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team

ElvenFury

04-22-2010, 11:54 AM

Looks like Oscuro has learned to stretch "QQ" out a bit (not that Grendeg doesn't have it coming).

Drew

04-22-2010, 11:57 AM

This was my reply:

The irony of you rage-quitting is that the reason that precipitated it is the time Oscuro has been spending on the rogue boards. If he had just been quiet you could have posted your ideas into the ether and been only moderately unhappy. Now that he actually responded, but with the opposite answer than you desired, you're quitting under the auspices of "poor communication" when really the desired result is "my ideas are embraced".

Celephais

04-22-2010, 12:00 PM

This was my reply:
Nicely put, I agree with you there.

WRoss

04-22-2010, 12:10 PM

About time someone told him that his attitude of being incapable of being wrong is quite distasteful. I personally imagine Grendeg as some guy in a Knights Templar outfit behind the computer screaming, "Grendeg wills it!" whenever he posts.

droit

04-22-2010, 01:09 PM

http://forum.gsplayers.com/showthread.php?t=41704

Read above while listening to:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7yfISlGLNU

Goddamn thats funny.

Danical

04-22-2010, 01:26 PM

I would like to echo one of Grendeg's points.

How many times have the players asked about a game mechanic and how long did it take, if ever, to be answered? I understand some mechanics are just simply a mess of code and it would take too long - time better spend in development. If that's the case, then just say, "it's a mess and we'll get back to you when time permits." Being ignored when you ask a question can be fantastically infuriating and Grendeg asks quite a lot of questions.

Basically, until Oscuro's (and Tiqul?) recent engagement with the players, there just simply hasn't been a lot of communication by GMs. Sometimes any response is better than no response; a simple "No" to a proposed idea/question is better than feeling you're being ignored. Additionally, I think a lot of Grendeg's frustration comes from the fact that if he knew all the details of GS that the GMs have access/knowledge of he might have ideas more in line with Oscuro's.

I, for one, wouldn't want to lose the voice of Grendeg because as Oscuro points out, he's got a lot good ideas.

Sidenote: I would support Grendeg for GM because I think he's passionate about GS, understands GS, and is able to work collaboratively (despite some views of him). Also, he'd post a lot less which I imagine some people would be pretty keen on. :D

Drew

04-22-2010, 02:45 PM

GS has long had a policy of not revealing the formula behind most mechanics. That has never changed, every now and again they will give us something, but it's established that most things won't be told. If you already know that why get upset when it's not told?

Lord Orbstar

04-22-2010, 04:26 PM

Grendeg is a whiny bitch and Oscuro was being kind in trying to make him feel happy and important. On a message board for a text based video game. Seriously. get over it.

SIMU is not the company we would run if we were in charge. Of course, if we were in charge there would be people thinking we were fucked up too and just needed to listen to them.

I am appreciative there is a rogue guru working issues and systems. I may not agree with everything, but I am not gonna take my toys and go home like a fucking 6 year old.

waywardgs

04-22-2010, 05:42 PM

04-22-2010, 06:27 PM

The recent discussion going on in the rogue folder I thought was healthy and interesting. Unfortunately it seems that such discussion is the exception, not the rule, particularly in the rogue folder. There is definitely something wrong with a profession when the only professions to have less posts in their folders are those that don't even exist yet. Rogues have about 1400 posts, the next is pallys with 3.8k, then between 5-10k for the other professions. More discussion is needed in there.

What? The rogue folder has the most posts of any profession folder by about 13,000 posts.

Where are you pulling your numbers from?

waywardgs

04-22-2010, 09:09 PM

What? The rogue folder has the most posts of any profession folder by about 13,000 posts.

Where are you pulling your numbers from?

Edit.. yeah, I was looking at unread posts... nevermind. Heh.

Fallen

04-22-2010, 10:54 PM

>>Between Wind Wraiths at 63 on Teras or the 62nd level Swordsman in The Citadel in River's Rest the undead gap until Naisirc at 75th in the rift is simply egregious. This should have been addressed 10 years ago and if not then during the GSIV conversion.

I agree. I'm currently working on the hunting expansion for Four Winds Isle. This will not address this gap. However, if this gap hasn't been filled once I'm done, I'll see what I can do about it.

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team
*
.

Asrial

04-23-2010, 12:35 AM

Where was that posted?

Latrinsorm

04-23-2010, 01:43 AM

People should be forced to call it the undead "gap", or perhaps the undead crevice. The more synonyms I think about the more grossed out I get.

Fallen

04-23-2010, 07:24 AM

Where was that posted?

I need to start posting a hyperlink with the clips. I have no idea, as I don't really read based on folder.

Riltus

04-23-2010, 07:39 AM

Where was that posted?

https://www.play.net/forums/messages.asp?forum=102&category=4&topic=2&message=8241

Mark

Celephais

04-23-2010, 12:00 PM

People should be forced to call it the undead "gap", or perhaps the undead crevice. The more synonyms I think about the more grossed out I get.
More like undead goatse.

droit

04-23-2010, 01:51 PM

A new option has been added to the INVENTORY verb which will allow you to see where various items are worn and if they are classified as functional or non-functional:
INVENTORY LOCATION

In addition, INVENTORY FULL will now show if items have been REGISTER'd or MARK'd. Locker manifests will also now reflect this information. (Thanks to GM Oscuro for the REGISTER/MARK update to inventory and manifests!)

~Lusus

This message was originally posted in Game Design Discussions, Items and Inventory. To discuss the above follow the link below.

http://www.play.net/forums/messages.asp?forum=102&category=6&topic=11&message=2392

mgoddess

04-23-2010, 05:07 PM

Baelog

04-23-2010, 05:14 PM

>get glove
You remove some ocean-blue casting gloves with silvery sigils from in your grey wool jacket.
>inspect glove
Inspecting that may not be a sound idea.
>wear glove
You easily slide your hands into your blue casting gloves, and then tug slightly to get them fitted properly to your fingers. As you flex your hands, the silvery sigils on the backs of your gloves shimmer slightly.
>inv loca
You are currently wearing:
Worn as a pin:
some ocean-blue casting gloves with silvery sigils (functional)

Looks like it works

mgoddess

04-23-2010, 05:15 PM

Excellent. Thanks for checking!

TheLastShamurai

04-26-2010, 09:57 AM

>>Since cman side by side has been implemented for any profession to train now, how about allowing for the AS bonus to apply towards bolt spells? It's my understanding, although I haven't tested it, that it already applies to ranged attacks, and I don't see bolt spells operating all that differently from a logical standpoint.

It shouldn't be applying to ranged attacks - if it is, it's an error. So, no, it won't be applying to bolt AS either. Side by Side should be applying to close-quarters combat. The applicable ASes would be melee attacks, ambush attacks from the open and MSTRIKE. MSTRIKE AS not being affected currently is a bug as well and we're working on remedying it.

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team

.

Inspire

04-28-2010, 03:42 PM

Currently, I'm still CGM status, so my own contributions are limited. I don't have a ton of time.

That being said, I just implemented lore benefits for two 500s spells last week, and I've had a number of 900s completed for a while now.

We still have design work to do on a number of spells, which is again set back by my absence. I'm trying to get some more stuff laid in for the 500s to get some more implemented soon.

Then, of course, there is QC. Realistically, I have no idea for a time frame. I'm thinking that after the next batch of implementation, I might try to push this through QC and get this stuff out to you guys as a sort of part one release. That all depends on what Strathspey, my partner in crime, and Mestys think about it.

I'll throw in that I'm really sorry about the time this is taking, but you all know the song and dance by now.

--
Naos

I'm immune to fire!
Now with more banhammer!

Inspire

04-28-2010, 03:43 PM

(540)

It would be Air for temporal effects, yep.

--
Naos

I'm immune to fire!
Now with more banhammer!

Inspire

04-28-2010, 03:43 PM

As far as I'm currently aware (it's a bit hazy) the intent is for Earth lore to only adjust physical attack strength.

I don't believe it gives increased encumbrance mitigation, nor is it supposed to lower ranged roundtime. Strength plus Haste would be pretty ridiculous for a Wizard that uses ranged weapons.

Heck, Haste alone already makes Ranged Wizard ridiculous.

--
Naos

I'm immune to fire!

Inspire

04-28-2010, 03:48 PM

It is intentional that Paladins do not have to link to the target of 1640, and thus, do not suffer a 1640 cooldown if the target then dies thereafter. This is an aspect of Clerics, who are not limited in the number of raises per day.

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team
reply

Inspire

04-28-2010, 04:31 PM

>>A while ago Oscuro (I think) posted something about adding a little something to batter. Wondering if that ever made its way out unannounced?

Yes. Warriors that hunt liches in the Scatter should know what it is.

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team

>>What, the ability to bash a philactery?

Batter ranks deal more damage to it, causing it to be destroyed faster than people w/o batter.

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team

Inspire

04-28-2010, 04:31 PM

>Will the affects of the cube help the hidden roll of a warcry?

No, just CMAN rolls.

Coase

Inspire

04-28-2010, 04:51 PM

Sorcerer guild structures do not have magical workshops by default. In fact, it isn't even an option. While some sorcerer spells do gain benefit from a workshop, these aren't what I would call profession defining. I don't expect this to change.

If you, as a sorcerer, really want access to a workshop there are a number of public workshop options, though I realize that these are not available in all realms. Also, there are CHE and MHO as options for access to a workshop. Again, not necessarily available in all realms. However, the fact is that you don't NEED a workshop to be successful with the few spells that benefit from one (only Scroll Infusion and Magic Item Creation off the top of my head.) Wizards, on the other hand, really do NEED a workshop to be successful; realistically, if you're enchanting outside of a workshop then You're Doing It Wrong.

As for updates to SENSE, they sound pretty good to me.

--
Naos

I'm immune to fire!

Inspire

04-28-2010, 05:06 PM

>>And... it would also be nice if someone (Oscuro? Ildran? Coase?) could confirm weather or not Armored Stealth factored into the success rate of Silent Strike.

No, it does not.

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team

>>I wouldn't have even though to ask. I had assumed that it was essentially a hide roll with some added penalties based on weapon base or whatever. i.e. any effects that give you some bonus to hiding whatsoever apply. Not that I even use it in the first place... but that's interesting.

Silent Strike success is a function of about half the variables that an actual hiding roll uses as well as ranks in Silent Strike.

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team

Inspire

04-29-2010, 07:35 AM

Sorcerers never were the cool kids. They were always the creepy goth kids.

--
Naos, just sayin'

I'm immune to fire! Now with more banhammer! You sense the bond between you and your grey cat grow stronger.
reply

>prep 720
You trace an intricate sign that contorts in the air while forcefully invoking Implosion...
Your spell is ready.
>cast Naos
...

I've not gone anywhere guys, so don't worry about that. I did take some time with all of the information you gave me and I am working through a rather large series of ideas for how to make sorcerers "the cool kids" again. Sometimes things don't move as quickly as you (or I) would like them to, but rest assured that I have a lot of things in mind that I hope to discuss with you in the future.

For the time being, as has been mentioned elsewhere, we are turning all resources to getting monks out the door as quickly as possible. I know it may sound like a lot to ask, but please bear with me while we all work to get this albatross from around our necks.

As an aside, I knew quite well the can of worms I was opening in advance, but it was one I felt needed to be looked into. Thank you to everyone who contributed to the discussion, I appreciate all of you taking the time and making the effort. As I said then, I will say now that I can make no promises, but I do have hopes that your input can be turned into something worthwhile.

Thank you again,
GM Tiqal.

"You're in America now. Our idea of diplomacy is showing up with a gun in one hand and a sandwich in the other and asking which you'd prefer."
"You brought a sandwich?"
"Who do I look like, Kissinger?"
~The Dresden Files, Jim Butcher. "Turn Coat"

Inspire

04-29-2010, 07:38 AM

>>Since paladins got dirt kick, a very roguish CMAN, I think that we should be able to get parry mastery. It's only fair.

While I understand that Rogues covet more defense, they have Evade Mastery specifically for this purpose. Block and Parry mastery will not be opened for Rogues - they are meant to be distinguishing maneuvers for Warriors. Also, every profession has access to Dirtkick and Paladins do not have access to Parry Mastery, so I fail to see the connection.

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team

Inspire

04-29-2010, 07:39 AM

>>Oscuro, as has been mentioned, we are very much combat squares many(if not most) of whom wear heavy armor, making evade mastery worthless. Rogues who wear heavy armor deserve to have a defensive skill for use with heavy armor, the same as warriors. We should not be penalized for wearing plate armor when it is a part of our class.

You're not penalized. It's an opportunity cost. You can choose either the defense method of avoiding more attacks or the method of getting hit, but taking less damage from those attacks. Options are a good thing. What we don't want to do is make one path objectively better. Since there is always debate on the forums about whether one should go heavy or light armor, I think we're doing alright. However, heavy armor seems to be winning more than light, so if anything, we need to give more benefits for light armor and not just flat defense bonuses around. Rogue defenses in general are more than adequate.

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team

Inspire

04-29-2010, 07:40 AM

>>I question whether your implementation of evasion mastery convinced any additional rogues to move to light armor if they weren't in it already. As you point out, heavy armor wins more often than light armor, and for good reason. The core armor mechanics are simply unbalanced in favor of heavy armor with too many advantages.

I think heavy armor wins more often because people already have fantastic suits of heavy armor so the "activation energy" of switching is far higher than if they didn't. Light armor has serious mechanical advantages over heavy armor. I, personally, would never put a Rogue in anything heavier than a chain shirt simply because of the cost:benefit ratio taking a nosedive thereafter. We've had this discussion last year, though, and unless there's any new suggestions, I'm not about to have it again so I can spend time working on new CMAN additions, like Divert, instead.

>>However, before you take that as my endorsement of going away to create even more light armor benefits, I also maintain that high level and postcap rogues, as currently implemented, are among the weakest classes in Gemstone, competing for the low slot with warriors. That would be in light or heavy armor. I'd rather see the rogue class brought up as a whole rather than the light armor balanced equally with heavy armor, leaving both well underpowered in general.

Rogues are hardly underpowered. There are a few abilities I'd like to see them get, but these would just be options, not something every Rogue is going to take, to further diversify the class. For instance, from a design perspective, I'd like to make high INF stat Rogues more interesting (rather than just having high DEX and high STR be the main go-to stats) and one way I'm accomplishing that is with CMAN Divert.

>>I've posted my solution in the past -- a totally reworked stealth system that gives major advantages to light armor and low spellpower. You didn't seem to like it much though. Was that because of design principles, or simply because there isn't enough dev staff to implement a project of that nature? I admit it would certainly be a big one. And if the latter, is there any way you can encourage Sirina to hire a dev-heavy class? I've posted my analysis before, but the dev team is now the smallest it has ever been since arranged in its more-or-less present form.

The stealth system is fine as is and a complete rework would be an extremely inefficient use of time. Also, it's not my place to discuss hiring.

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team

Inspire

04-29-2010, 07:43 AM

>>TD

TD isn't necessary when your opponent can't even cast. This is why we've provided Rogues with plenty of different mechanics to disrupt casting. Cutthroat, Throat Chop, and Groin Kick all do this, as well as the old fashioned tactic of just stunning something. I think you're simply looking for something easy, like a passive defense, but frankly, they're boring and just make combat turn into HIDE, AMBUSH, HIDE, AMBUSH. I much prefer changing it up by using the CMs available to me. This is a big reason why we're looking at reducing the CMP costs of active, targetted maneuvers rather than passive ones.

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team

Inspire

04-29-2010, 08:32 AM

I really don't see the stealth system as an issue with Rogues. The two major Rogue gripes I hear are that offensive CMANs are underpowered/undesirable and that light armor needs to be better for reasons other than casting and/or needs defense vs spells. The stealth system is disjoint from these complaints.

Grendeg, you keep preaching to completely redesign the stealth system, but I can't recall seeing a compelling case for it. What problems do you (or anyone) see with the current stealth system that you feel need to be addressed? Can these problems not be dealt with while working with what we have? If not, how does your proposed new stealth system deal with these issues while not creating others?

Rewriting an entire, deeply embedded game system like stealth would be a massive change (easily hundreds of man-hours), and wouldn't be done unless it were overwhelmingly compelling reasons to do so. I have lots of ideas for improving Rogue gameplay but most of these are to improve current CMANs or add new ones, thus working within our current system and, because of this, are far more likely to see the light of Elanthia. However, if such a stealth redesign is, in fact, better for the game, I'd like to hear it.

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team

Inspire

04-29-2010, 08:34 AM

>>2.) Game play at postcap is critical.

I agree with this statement, and much of the dev team does as well. This is why we've been adding so many additional systems to the game so players have things to do beyond simply hunting the same hunting ground and returning when fried. The bounty system was a major first step towards this path, then the Guardians of Sunfist society was released. Alchemy exists for pures who like that kind of pass time (I'm fully aware that many don't, but this isn't the place to discuss that). Bandit tasks were an interesting addition to the AdvG. The new cap and post-capped hunting areas in the Rift were also additions for capped folks. And we have other things coming down the pipe. Interesting additions for capped players is certainly an area of major focus for the dev team.

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team

Inspire

04-29-2010, 08:34 AM

>>First major fix that would make me happier with stealth personally would be fixing how groups and group spells work with it.

Oh, right, that. Yeah, that's something on the list, and it's being worked on, but it's a slow going kind of thing. There are thousands of lines of code spread throughout many systems that need to be updated for this to take effect. It will be done, but it's not exactly around the corner. Not like other things I'm working on. ;)

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team

Inspire

04-29-2010, 08:35 AM

>>There should be more pickable locks like the rolaren gate strewn throughout the lands.

I have some plans for this with new areas I'm helping with. I've always found picking to be a fun component of being a Rogue

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team

Inspire

04-29-2010, 08:37 AM

>>Light armor needs to be better for reasons other than casting? Who's complaining about casting in light armor? And you mean that lighter armor needs more defense against spells, right?

There have been several complaints that the main benefit for wearing light armor is that it allows you to cast. However, the general opinion is Rogues shouldn't have to cast. So, people are either forsaking their ideal view of Rogues by casting in light armor or by wearing plate armor. I find this to be a difficult dilemma and have fewer solutions for this than ideas for the CMAN system.

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team
reply

Inspire

04-29-2010, 08:44 AM

>Unfortunately this type of stealth does not translate well to computer roleplaying games. The reason is simple: CRPGs are typically designed to emphasize combat, whereas stealth is usually intended to avoid combat until it can be initiated on favorable terms.

As you say, this is indeed THE problem with stealth-combat. However, it is in fact, unresolvable in any practical context. Your thematic rogue will never find himself in a position where he has to kill X number of things in a short time period*. Thus any attempt to create stealth mechanics that feel real, yet still accommodate "hunting", is going to fall short. Stealth-combat is inherently flawed; there's no way to force it to coexist with all the other classes without giving up either practicality or realism. The only thing you can do is attempt to create an alternate experience-gain system (like the AdvG?) where you gain experience from doing stealthy tasks without having to kill lots of things. This is what you should argue for, rather than trying to re-vamp stealth-combat.

>1a) If a character leaves hiding (voluntarily or involuntarily), they should not be able to slip back into hiding trivially, having been exposed. This includes not being able to run one room over and sneak back in.

And this is the big problem with your system. If hiding is non-trivial (as it needs to be to meet your thematic standards), then hunting more than one creature at a time is going to be cumbersome. Again, there's no way to rectify stealth mechanics with the need to kill many creatures to advance.

On another note, 2b-2e can all be implemented as CMANs without completely redoing stealth (some already are, as you said). As can 4a/b. 3a/b could also be pretty trivially implemented without a stealth overhaul. I think both of these are warranted, personally, and would gladly take them in the context of other improvements to the non-spelled, light-armored rogue (such as a haste-like CMAN as I mentioned before). Regardless, I fail to see any need to "overhaul" hiding in any way. But a couple of these changes/additions would be nice to look at on their own.

- Greminty

* Well, he might, but I'd argue then he's being more like a thematic ninja, rather than a rogue.

Greminty quite eloquently said what I was thinking with regard to the stealth system revamp proposal. I think the best thing we can do is to simply improve upon the current system by having more CMANs or improving current CMANs.

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team
reply

Inspire

04-29-2010, 08:45 AM

>>Oscuro, you were the one to request clarification from me specifically, down to addressing me by name. I don't think it's unreasonable for me to expect more of a response than one line stating you agree with someone else -- particularly when I already expressed the opinion that the "someone else" had missed the entire point. Speak for yourself, instead. If you think there's a problem in my reasoning, then state it openly and I'll clarify.

I specifically addressed you because you're the one who continuously brings up the idea of how a completely new stealth system would be the panacea for Rogue troubles. I was curious how this could possibly be the case.

You argue that Greminty (and perhaps myself) were predisposed to disagree and so his (our) opinions weren't valid. However, you yourself claim that your proposal is such an improvement over the currently system that you "honestly don't see how people could not think so," which tells me that if anyone is predisposed to an opinion, it's yourself.

Greminty pointed out the major flaws in your proposal in that it is simply impossible to draw an exact parallel between a literature scenario and an MMO combat system. Also, you seem to imply that there's something inherently wrong with the way that MMOs traditionally handle stealth, which I disagree with considering that Rogue type classes are typically quite popular in those games as well. While it may not be the most RP appropriate, that isn't always what's important when it comes down to actual gameplay - feasibility, fun and balance are all more important.

You also claim that under the current system "rogues are slow," and that your system addresses that. However, your system essentially forces a Rogue to only engage one opponent and even potentially has to stalk them from room to room and can't even re-enter stealth vs their opponent. This seems far slower than the current system, if not directly in RT, but in setting yourself up for the kill.

Additionally, there's the complaint that "rogues are fragile, particularly in light armor," and that your system addresses that. However, your system now makes Rogues apparently more susceptible to attacks when not hidden and makes them come under attack more easily from spells while hidden and their stealth level is decreased by wearing defensive spells. It certainly seems like Rogues are far more fragile in this scenario.

You do have some good ideas. Particularly, I like the aspect of staying in hiding for more of combat, which essentially increases Rogue defense. I also like the ideas of more "dirty tricks" from hiding. But these are all ideas that can simply be included in the extant system.

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team

Inspire

04-29-2010, 08:54 AM

>>First, I want to address the word "redesign."

Not that it really matters, but redesign, to me, means throw away everything we currently have and start anew. This is not an option. Releasing a half-dozen new CMs and making a couple minor tweaks to the HIDEing formula or something is certainly possible and are things that I've been working on in terms of proposing them to the dev team, so I suppose that you could say that I'm working on a "stealth redesign," but really I'd call it a "Rogue stealth CM update," especially since most of my proposed changes would only be affecting Rogues.

>>It could cut back on crit randomization. It could impose an extra status effect beyond the normal weapon damage. Tell me, is a "slow" ambush worth being able to take down a grizzled bounty critter with one single devastating strike? How far could you uphunt if you were willing to take significant time on each critter to stalk it and get the best shot?

First, crit randomization is here to stay. It is an integral part of GS4, taking us further away from the realm of GS3 where we were guaranteed that "if I hit, it died, but if I missed I died." We want Rogues to be able to land hits almost always so they can disable their opponents with their attacks, but we do not want guaranteed kills with each strike. That is simply too strong and destroys an enormous element of danger - and thus fun. An auto-kill ability is especially not going to be given for things like grizzled creatures because of the challenge they're meant to present.

>>Being able to ambush two critters at once, kicking a dirt cloud into the face of one critter (and imposing RT) while performing a normal ambush on a second in the room?

This, I think, is far more feasible.

>>It could impose an extra status effect beyond the normal weapon damage.

This is an idea that I'd like to explore more.

>>Set a concealed trap so that the critter triggers it as soon as they attempt to leave the room.

I think this snare idea may be more flavor appropriate for Rangers.

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team

Inspire

04-29-2010, 08:55 AM

>>Oscuro, what about rolling in Silent Strike as a "flare" of Shadow Mastery, and perhaps giving Shadow Mastery phantom benefits to maneuvers activated from hiding?

I prefer Silent Strike being predictable (i.e. I can use it when I want it) rather than it be a flare.

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team

Inspire

05-01-2010, 12:20 PM

While coding the hybrid casting stuff, I noticed a bug with the MnS circle where it was not properly accounting for Ranger spell ranks (it was considering them as a spiritual circle). This has been fixed. Y'all should see a (slight) increase in your MnS CS.

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team

>>Umm, and just what CS based MnS spell would we be casting? Unbalance?

I suspect few Rangers are using MnS warding spells. I just figured I've give the heads up.

>>Does 118 have a CS component?

Yes, the non-bolt single-target version is a visible warding roll and area webs use a hidden warding roll.

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team

>>Errr... Ranger is a Spiritual circle.

>>Did you mean to say <one of the other Realms>, like "Elemental"?

Oops, yeah, I meant to say "it was NOT considering them as a spiritual circle."

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team

Inspire

05-01-2010, 01:03 PM

Continued from Discussions with Simutronics (http://www.play.net/forums/messages.asp?forum=102&category=8&topic=3&message=44008)

>>After the command is entered and I'm in ungodly amounts of RT am I safe to stop paying attention to that game window, bearing in mind that my script will enter no other command until I specifically tell it to? -- KEEFA

Alright, here's a scenario:

1. You're using a script while forging, and have just entered your "trigger command" to initiate the script. Alternately, you don't have a fancy-schmancy "trigger command" and are just letting your nifty script prance around on its own. Either way, the game wanted you to enter a command in order to start this round of forging and, either way, your script just entered that command.
2. Queue the start of this round of forging, as well as flavor messaging and RT.
3. Queue more flavor messaging and RT.
4. Queue still more flavors (Baskin Robbins, anyone?). Oh yeah, and RT.
5. Eventually, queue the system finishing that round of messages, flavors, and RT, and is sitting there waiting for you to respond.
6. You respond, either with a fancy-schmancy trigger which enters the next command for you, or your script auto-enters the next command. Either way, the game got player input.

Somewhere during all of that, I'm gonna test you (yes, sometimes even during the flavor messaging, but that's probably just to see if I can get a rise out of you or, at the very least, to try and give you a really big clue that you're being tested and that you should be paying attention by the time all the RT is over). Normally, I'm gonna do it right after you entered a command... after all, if you're hitting ENTER, you should be there, right? Now, say you don't respond right off... that's not an automatic trip to Limbo (staff isn't that dumb). Like you said, you probably went off to do something during the RT. But, if you're not using triggers, I hope you're back before the end of that forging round... 'cause I'm probably gonna test you again the second I see you type something else. The more times I see you type, and the more tests I send as a result, and the more times you're not responding (but you're still entering commands), I might as well just hand you a shovel and let you keep digging your grave... seriously.

Now, I'm obviously not in a position to tell you, "Okay, so if you haven't gotten tested by 'flavor messaging set 3', then you're safe and can go on about your business"... 'cause I'm not in that position. But if you're repeatedly not responding to a GM testing you (via IC messaging or blatant SENDs or whatever), then you're setting yourself up for failure. If I'm generating additional RT when I'm sending those messages (personally, I usually do), that's another clear sign that something's up (random messages don't usually get RT unless something's up... and SENDs definitely don't).

That being said, the excuse that "Well, I spoke the minute you moved me to Limbo/Consultation Lounge/the Reach Tunnels, so I was there the whole time" doesn't really fly... ever heard of MATCHWAIT? Get the room title for a room and, when you're moved there, you can set a trigger to speak... so that really doesn't work with me (God, I just gave away a secret, didn't I?... um... not really).

>>The problem is primarily centered around forging because nothing else in the game is going to give you 10 minutes of RT with a policy, no incentive to watch that RT and a policy that has been waffled about whether or not we are required to watch that RT.

Watch the RT? Not really, no... you don't have to sit there through the entire RT (speaking of which... all you people that I've busted for unattended script forging... you ALL made ME wait through ALL of that messaging, and my eyes burn... thanks ALOT! Heh...). You DO have to make sure that you give enough reasonable time after entering a command to make sure that, if a GM is gonna test you, you're there to respond. As far as defining that "reasonable time" in a number... it'll never happen (mainly because someone somewhere down the line will claim that we counted too fast!). Just make sure that you're watching out for GM testing after you enter a command and chances are pretty good that you'll be just fine.

By the way... all those scripts that rush you out of the workshop to buy more materials, then rush you back in and restart the process... um... there's alot of commands there... and yeah, really... be attentive.

~
GM Emeradan
GS4-EMERADAN@PLAY.NET
Forums Manager
Bugs Manager
~
GemStone IV: One MMORPG to Rule Them All.
"Master of the Black Helicopters." -- BROWNA94

Inspire

05-01-2010, 01:10 PM

Re: Simple question regarding Inn Tables · on 6/19/2009 2:01:08 PM Generate a link to this post in a pop-up window. 1521
reply Reply
Tables and areas with lockable entries (like lockable doors in local inns, Premium homes, etc.) are fine for pretty much whatever - just make sure you actually closed and locked/latched the door first. If you can't control access by another player, then it's probably not a safe spot.

~
GM Emeradan
GS4-EMERADAN@PLAY.NET
"That Guy"
~
GemStone IV: One MMORPG to Rule Them All.
"Master of the Black Helicopters." -- BROWNA94

Inspire

05-01-2010, 01:13 PM

Grendeg, you've got the fields mostly right. For hair there are actually four fields: Color, Style, Texture, Quirks. For eyes there are two: Color, Characteristic.

The other fields are:

Complexion, nose, face, wing (for aelotoi), distinguishing mark, and custom/unique.

The distinguishing mark field is where you'll see things about beards or ears, but you can put something else appropriate there if you want to with an alteration. You can go into any of the feature pavilions in the game to see what the normal options are for each of the fields listed above to get a better idea of how they work.

The unique field is intended for things that don't already have options in order to tell more about how your character looks and it's the most flexible field as to how things are worded. But no, you couldn't use it as a means to combine the other fields into a different wording/format. It's meant for additional information. (Not all fields have to be used, they can be cleared if you want to. That option is available in the pavilions I believe.)

There are a few things in the game that reference your feature fields, for instance eye color and complexion.

Zyllah

Kate: "Do you know the runes on your sword are nonsense?"

Raphael: "Yes, but they look mysterious."

- From Magic Strikes

Inspire

05-01-2010, 01:25 PM

For a stat potion, you're also granted another use of FIXSKILL. They don't stack, so if you already have one, you're not going to end up with two. Here's how to use a stat potion:

>glance
You glance down to see a hazy green potion in your right hand and nothing in your left hand.
>l my potion
You see nothing unusual.
>fixskill
Sorry, you have already used your one-time fix skill option.
>drink my potion
As you raise the green potion to your lips, you stop for a few seconds to ponder the consequences of drinking it.

[Drinking from the potion will allow you access to the Stat Reassignment menu in the Character Manager. Reassigning your stats may require changes in your prior skill training selections if your net Training Points (TPs) change as a result. If you understand this and would like the opportunity to reassign your stats, please DRINK from your potion again within the next 30 seconds.]

Roundtime: 3 sec.
R>drink my potion
You take a sip from the green potion. You suddenly feel the urge to lie down and rest. Perhaps you should CHECK IN at the local inn?

[You have been granted 1 stat reassignment. Please enter the Character Manager at a local inn and select the Reassign Stats menu option to proceed.]
That was the last drop.
The green potion shatters into twinkling dust.
Roundtime: 3 sec.
R>fixskill
The FIXSKILLS command will allow you to instantly set your skills to match your goals. Use the GOALS command to set your skills to your desired values FIRST!

You may view FIXSKILLS HELP for more information on this option.

To use FIXSKILLS, you must type FIXSKILL CONFIRM within the next 30 seconds.

*** No additional options will be granted outside of normal parameters for misuse. ***

** Make sure your skills are set how you want them with GOALS before using FIXSKILLS CONFIRM **

~
GM Emeradan
GS4-EMERADAN@PLAY.NET
Forums Manager
Bugs Manager
~
GemStone IV: One MMORPG to Rule Them All.
"Master of the Black Helicopters." -- BROWNA94

Inspire

05-01-2010, 08:03 PM

>>Exactly Ondreian, no ability should be designed around a capped players usage, as it penalizes the >100 crowd who needs to use it far more.

I think you mean <100, but no, the skill cost is not designed around capped players, and I don't see how people who are not capped need it more, when many players argue that speed is absolutely essential at cap, but is not really that important earlier. Even though it isn't designed only for capped players, I think it would be perfectly legitimate to design maneuvers with capped players in mind, simply because there should be more interesting things at and beyond the level cap, as many a player has requested. So I wouldn't be opposed to designing CMs with high prerequisites (which I have done for both Rogues and Monks) with the intention that they'd be used almost exclusively by capped players.

>>Any thoughts on the possiblity of parry OR evade mastery, but not both boss?

My thoughts are against this proposal. Offering a choice of parry mastery over evade mastery does little beyond giving Rogues in plate even more power. They would forgo the 1% per rank increase of Evade Mastery for the 5% per rank increase of Parry Mastery (which essentially becomes 10% per rank with TWC), giving even more defense to a build that we're trying to discourage. I am far more interested in empowering defense for Rogues in light armor and most likely through indirect methods like making new stealth abilities more useful for them and easier for them to remain hidden, thus, away from creatures' attacks.

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team
reply

>>Perhaps something like.. Rangers get spike pits, deadlog falls and snares hanging from trees (more natural-ish) and rogues get concealed jaw traps, smoke bomb and poison scarab(darts-type) hurling traps (all traps based on LM stuffs)?.

I definitely like the jaw trap idea, which I think could be a relatively simple update. I don't know about the rest. Disarming a scarab renders it useless as a trap. Needles seem less useful and less plausible for an enemy to step on, and smoke bombs would have to be a new box trap for it to be recoverable via LM.

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team
reply

>>Oscuro, What comes to mind when you think of a rogue? What can we change to make them like that?

There are a lot of different builds that I think are Roguish:
1) The traditional Cloak and Dagger Rogue. They use stealth as a defense and stab things with a dagger or other small weapon in precision strikes. This is the standard AMBUSH Rogue build and is the one I want to add the most support to.

2) Swashbuckler. These types typically forgo stealth and remain in the open wielding two weapons and will train in MOC so they can offset FoF and do the occasional MSTRIKE. As Rogues, they'll usually stick with lighter weapons so they remain quick. This is the build that I felt Evade Mastery benefits the most, since you need to EBP if you're not in stealth. I have a couple ideas to boost this build, too.

3) Sniper. Archer or Thrown weapon Rogues that attack from hiding. Ranged combat is not my expertise and, from what I can tell, is overpowered, so I don't think I'm going to be touching that. Thrown weapons can use a lot of help, and GM Lusus is actively working on that project and I'm looking forward to its resolution as much as anyone.

4) The Arcane Trickster. A Rogue that uses a few magic spells to improve their other abilities. Since magic skills have high costs, this typically means forgoing a lot of other strengths, but it does provide a lot of additional options. I think lots of Rogues have headed in this direction post-cap since the higher TP cost is irrelevant at that stage. This provides a bit of a balance issue, but I'd rather attempt to make the other builds more appealing than directly penalize this one.

5) The Ruffian. This is a build that acts similar to Warriors where they usually fight in the open, in heavy armor and use heavy weapons. They differ from Warriors in that they use Rogue style dirty tricks to overcome their foes. I have no problems with this style, but I think far more Rogues go this direction than one would think and it's because plate armor is simply too appealing and isn't penalized enough for the activities that the other builds need to do, such as hiding. While I would like to introduce penalties to stealth rolls for wearing plate, I don't think this is achievable without having a veritable riot on my hands - at least not without making lighter armor more viable first. It's best to approach this by just giving an opportunity cost for not picking light armor.

These are the main builds I envision Rogues having. Of course there are many that are hybrids of these but I think it covers the bases pretty well.

My main design goals for Rogues are the following:
1) Make offensive CMANs more useful so they truly are an integrated aspect of Rogue combat.
2) Improve stealth combat so it's more easily used as a defense mechanism.
3) Make light armor more appealing than it is by providing better defense.

A couple lesser goals that I have:
1) Make the INF stat more useful as I like the idea of charismatic Rogues being a decent stat build beyond just a dexterous or a strong rogue. This should mostly appeal to the Swashbuckler build.
2) Make lighter weapons more useful. This was handled very well with the conversion to GS4, but I do have a couple extra ideas here.

All of this is still up for discussion and is most certainly in the design stage. There are no guarantees. If I get some things approved, I plan to present most of the stuff ahead of time so there's time for discussion before I dive head first into coding. This is what I did with Divert.

I really must stress that beyond Divert, none of this is either guaranteed nor even if it's approved, will it likely be released in short order. Monks are priority one for the dev team until that project is complete.

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team

Inspire

05-01-2010, 08:03 PM

>>Why a small weapon instead of any weapon? What's wrong with a claidhmore?

Because ambushing with a dagger is 2/3 of the time ambushing with a heavy weapon, so you're back in the shadows faster, thus better defended. Also, it speeds up combat far more, which is a major complaint you seem to have. I've never had an issue killing things with a dagger. Most stuff dies in one hit, regardless of the armor they're in (at least at cap w/ 2x ambush).

In response to all the requests for details, I'm not about to show my hand when I can't promise to follow up. I won't give any details unless things I have approval of concept and resources.

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team

>>You're answering the wrong question. That's your mechanical reason for preferring smaller weapons, though it's a reason I have different views on. I was asking what makes one any more roguelike than the other speaking from the philosophy of roguedom, not the current implementation. By your own statement, you prefer the concept of smaller weapons. Why?

I already said why - because they're faster and the quintessential Rogue is quick.

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team

>>I think that's a very lamentable attitude on the part of staff these days. GMs used to freely talk about their ideas with the disclaimer that they weren't official and approved.

It's not attitude. It's policy. And I personally think it's a good one, b/c in the past, GMs promised all sorts of crazy things and now, the staff who's left, is essentially required to make good on those promises. A substantial number of my projects have been and are things former GMs promised and aren't really interesting to me. One day, I will leave staff, and I don't want the GMs I leave behind to be forced to take up projects I promised because I couldn't make good on them.

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team

>>Out of curiosity, where do you envision the locksmithing rogue amongst all of these paradigms or the generic 'jack of all trades' type rogue, or do you feel they belong to a more classical bardic character? When I look at your five descriptions, each one I can pinpoint what skills I would lack to make that build effective.

Jack of all trades falls under a hybrid of the styles I mentioned, which I said is probably where most actual characters lie. Locksmithing isn't a combat build, so I didn't mention it, but I do consider it an integral part of the Rogue profession.

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team

>>>>It's not attitude. It's policy.

>>So it is official policy for dev to be non-communicative.

First, it's unofficial dev policy - it's something we came to as a mutual consensus because of past occurrences. Also, you're putting words in my mouth saying that the policy is to be uncommunicative. That's not it at all. It's that we're not going to say we will do something until we have approval to do it. Obviously we can still communicate, and with whatever frequency we desire. Estild and I try to maintain dialogues with players about our approaches. Tiqal, our new recruit, has the same goal in mind. And I know that every dev GM listens to player concerns on the forums. It's just not all of them have the same personality nor time in terms of gregarious and prolific posting.

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team

Inspire

05-01-2010, 08:04 PM

>>More of these type rogues hunt old TaFaendryl than any other.

>>Making silent strike aim able and passive seems to a good solution here. Is this a possibility?

Making silent strike aimable and passive would completely negate the necessity to hide in the first place. The RT necessary to step into hiding is one of the main balancing factors of allowing ambush hiding to be as deadly as it is. I do agree that Silent Strike should be made more appealing so it is an integral part of the Cloak and Dagger Rogue's arsenal, but I don't necessarily think these are the directions.

>>Rogues in the open are fodder for spell casting creatures.. I am curious to see your ideas for this build. There were also similar builds for voln brawlers but Monks will probably make that look fairly tame by comparison.

I agree that this is certainly an area that would need to be addressed to keep this build workable.

>>I have yet to hear anyone quantify how ranged is overpowered. More than a few times I have stealthed into a room with a large swarm and have a pure build enter just after and wipe out the entire room before I was out of RT. Some type of wizard build that fried in about one second flat. :) Same situation, Ranger comes into the room I just stealthed into and bang, some mass effect spell, natures fury perhaps, and dead rogue along with a room full of creatures. Ive been killed in similar situations by sorcerers in old Ta Faendryl with mass elemental ewave, all just by accident. I do not begrudge pures or semis being powerful. But I dont get some of those same pures, semis and even some rogues complaining about ranged being so powerful in light of other things within the game that make ranged pale in comparison.

When the most powerful bow can have its RT dropped to the RT of a dagger, and then even below that if the attack is aimed, always deals puncture damage and has ways to increase the success of hitting the location desired far more easily than the already slower fighting style of melee, and has lower DS than melee, there's something objectively wrong from a balance perspective.

Yes, spell casters can use multi-target attacks, but these cost considerable mana - a limited resource. Firing repeated 3 second kill shots with no resource drain is not comparable.

>>At the very least crossbows could use some help.

Yep.

>>I am tempted to say that if any rogue build is overpowered it is a rogue in plate. :) But the official docs say something about rogues being only second to warriors in being able to wear heavy armor.
So it seems to me that was the intent of the design.

That profession blurb was written well before GSIV (the GemStone IV statement in it was from a Find/Replace on the play.net page) before things like the Dodge skill were released, which was meant to partially replace heavier armor for Rogues. Many of the profession blurbs are outdated, at least in some minor aspects.

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team

Inspire

05-01-2010, 08:04 PM

>>That is true, but it doesn't really apply to mind jolt. For some reason it's incredibly hard to pull off a stun maneuver from any length of mind jolt stun. Which, like Keleborrn said, would have probably given him RT past his stun which would have been his chance to get out of there.

>>Mind jolt sucks.

Mind Jolt can have long durations on high endrolls, but it's otherwise no harder to use StunManeuvers with than any other stun of equal duration.

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team

>>If I remember correctly, each number above a +100 roll on mind jolt equates to 1 second of being stunned. Am I right on this? What's the max length on the stuns? And how long is one stun round supposed to be?

Yes, 1 second per point of warding margin. I don't believe there is a max duration. One stun round is five seconds.

>>I agree with Grendeg that I'm not totally convinced there isn't a bug here. I don't know if it's because it's incredibly easy for anything casting mind jolt at a rogue to get a high endroll, but it's also my experience that magical stun = failmaneuvers.

Just checked it again and it's correct. What you may be seeing is that stuns from Mind Jolt are typically going to be 20+ seconds against most Rogues and the maximum difficulty is attained at 20 seconds (anything more isn't any harder). If you're a master in Stun Man and you have a decent DIS modifier, though, doing things like STUN STAND or STUN STANCE1 should be very easy even for long duration stuns. STUN MOVE, however, is very difficult with long stuns.

>>Again I would like to suggest is there anything that can be done to tone down mind jolt? Maybe .5 seconds per integer above the +100 endroll? The spell is just absolutely devastating.

That would be something to bring up in the Sorcerer folder. Personally, I think Mind Jolt is in line with its level in terms of power. Stun is one of the weakest status effects one can be under and the spell does nothing but stun. Its main strength is its duration.

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team

Inspire

05-01-2010, 08:05 PM

>>Does this mean that say, on an 8 round stun, the first 20 seconds will be at max difficulty and then the difficulty will start to decrease after 20 seconds, or does it mean that the difficulty of a stun man will start decreasing immediately?

It goes by duration of the stun at the time of the attempt, so it gets easier the longer you wait.

>>Also - does/would it possible to have stun move work on climbing moves?

This is something I planned on looking into eventually (i.e. after the offensive maneuver CMP costs and CMAN immunity/resistance stuff). I have a few ideas for Stun Maneuvers already, but if you guys have any, please post them (in the guild folder).

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team
reply

Inspire

05-01-2010, 09:22 PM

Hello rogues!

I have updated the IMT Rogue Guild shop to include the following spiffy items:

a set of gold filigree calipers etched with asymmetrical lines
a roughly sanded carmiln short bow with a cobalt suede grip
a lacquered slim ruic long bow with a leaf-etched tiller
a burnished ruic composite bow inlaid with green errisian topaz
a matte black leather quiver tooled with mithril studs
a glossy black leather quiver with maroon stitching

Hope this helps with the lack of ranged stuff etc!

<3

~Izzea
MHO Guru
Icemule Trace Guru
reply

Inspire

05-03-2010, 04:17 AM

I had a question about the change to capacity as far as where an item is worn in a slot. If I purchase a belt worn satchel that holds a VLA and look to get it altered, is the merchant going to convert it to the appropriate medium-size satchel?

And what about pin worn items that hold things? Are those manipulated in any way when taken to a merchant?

Thanks!

99.9 percent of the time, the capacity of your item is not going to be changed. That tiny fraction represents items that are broken, or that were made in such an incorrect and heinous fashion that allowing them to continue to exist would cause system problems. Your item's capacity will not be changed without notice, however, even in those cases.

Please be aware, however, that if you present a merchant with an item that is out-of-whack capacity wise, for its slot or for its description, the merchant may refuse to alter it into something else that continues to be out-of-whack. We won't require it be fixed, (accept in the cases of the fractional percent mentioned above) but we might not work on it.

As to pin-worn items, I'd need more details on what you mean. Can they be altered? Yes. Are there limitations? Also yes. Pin-worns tend to be more item specific.

Cheers,
Itzel

Team Plat
Forest Gnome Guru
Elven Nations Guru

Jaired says, "Stop standing in the way of the artistic picture that I am trying to paint through WORDS."

Thank you so much (again and always!) for the crazy quick response. I'm wanting to drop a few silver on some decent belt-worn containers and was concerned that they may get dropped down after I spent that silver.

>>As to pin-worn items, I'd need more details on what you mean. Can they be altered? Yes. Are there limitations? Also yes. Pin-worns tend to be more item specific.

As far as pin-worn items I meant if someone were to bring in a tunic that holds a large amount would the NPC be forced to convert it to chest worn.
reply

No, we wouldn't have to convert it. Though, based on the merchant (as this is one of those discretionary areas that we know you all looooove) we might not choose to alter it into another noun that should be chest-worn.

I know in my case if I'm given a VLA pin-worn tunic, I'll usually change it into a new tunic, or differently described tunic, but I won't make it a shirt, or a blouse. You get to keep the (potentially) illegal noun you have, but you don't get a new illegal noun.

Itzel

Team Plat
Forest Gnome Guru
Elven Nations Guru

Jaired says, "Stop standing in the way of the artistic picture that I am trying to paint through WORDS."

Inspire

05-03-2010, 04:50 AM

>Could you give the (non-lich) critters the ability to pass through the barriers in the Scatter? -Grendeg

Allowing creatures through portals tends to be an all or nothing thing. I don't think it would make much sense to add an exclusion for the liches, anyhow. Sometimes you will be forced into choosing between scarcity and difficulty.

Other allies' abilities will also help you increase survivability, particularly as far as fear mitigating effects are concerned.

-M.

>If that's so, it seems a good reason to not let liches pass through while otherwise allowing inhabitation rates to equal out for everything else -- critters would pass through both ways, after all. Or make the two areas separate gen zones, and so on.

The generators are actually broken down to split between the two halves of the Scatter, but there might be a bit of overlap that's causing the the issues.

>A secondary request, then. Could you make it possible to PEER through the barriers so at least we have an idea of what's waiting immediately on the other side? -Grendeg

Yeah, that's reasonable.

-M.
reply

Inspire

05-03-2010, 04:52 AM

Inspire

05-03-2010, 04:52 AM

>>I don't discount the undead gap, (honestly, I'm surprised it still exists)

I agree that it's a shame this still exists. It was even worse before we released the Citadel expansion, which was primarily to address the gap. The FWI hunting expansion will give some additional options in 75-85 range, but 65-75 is still sparse at best and is on the to do list.

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team

Inspire

05-03-2010, 04:55 AM

>>Oscuro if this martial stances idea is an April Fools joke I'm going to be very cross with you.

As I said, it was just an idea . I have 100 times more ideas than things I actually end up implementing. I just missed brainstorming on the boards, so I decided to share the thought. I question whether such a change to the existing skills is appropriate.

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team

>>I read Oscuro's suggestion as something where'd you pick one to become a more or less passive skill, and continue to use the other skills as normal, so I don't think he was suggesting we have to give up skills and only be able to use one at a time period...

That's not what I had envisioned. You could only have one active at a time. You could train in multiple skills and swap between them at will, however, albeit at stamina costs to activate.

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team

AMUSED1

05-03-2010, 01:36 PM

NOVAESKYE
It's not worth it at 7/0, especially for a young cleric.
Show me the difference between 20 ranks and 100 ranks and we can reconsider the 560 physical TP's it takes.

Those 70 ranks are almost double the bonus provided to non-rangers by Mobility (618). Pures typically have the most trouble with maneuvers, so it seems like a logical decision for my characters not to skip out on such ranks.

GameMaster Estild
Cleric/Empath Team
----

Very interesting data about physical fitness to hear.

Inspire

05-03-2010, 02:55 PM

What the heck.

Human Rogue:

Hm. I want to say none, being that she's lost (almost) everyone that ever meant anything to her, accomplished her one life's desire, only to lose it as well. Feels on uneasy footing with her deity of choice. But, there's still a spark in her. There's something there that wants to go on, regain what she had, however impossible she may actually think that is. So, right now, I'd have to say her only reason for living right now is the dim hope of reclaiming some shade of her former life.

Sylvan Cleric:

1. Learn to fog, gosh darn it.
2. Become the Priestess she feels she should be.
3. Honor her patron, devote her life to Her service, and spread the gospel, as it were.

Those are my only two biggies.

~ X.

Inspire

05-03-2010, 03:08 PM

I think most GMs working on official docs these days tend to take player influence pretty heavily into consideration when fleshing out history. I know when I was a player, hearing certain GMs were working on certain histories made me freak the hell out and hope they wouldn't ruin them - not because the GMs in questions were bad at their jobs, mind you, but they were coming at it from an entirely different angle than the players were, or they lacked familiarity with the community of people interested in that particular history.

In most cases, players are the only public figureheads or representatives of certain areas of culture, without you guys there'd just be like... a sentence or two in some really old document from the 90's. Some people literally pour years of effort into fleshing that out, which is way more time than GMs spend on a document - though I guess that's arguable, since we're so damn slow in putting them out sometimes. :D

That being said, there's always gonna be toes stepped on. You might play a brilliantly executed half-elf demon spawn who was somehow the result of a tryst with Marlu, a confused dwarf and an elven contortionist, but you probably won't get a nod from documentation or anything, and that's usually fine - the people who'd play those probably don't want to rely on docs. :)

Overall, I think we're (thankfully) moving toward a more choose-your-own-adventure history, or at least I am, and writing docs is about all I do these days. The Undead War is a great example of vastly conflicting viewpoints. The Dhe'nar history is all like, "WE HAS BOOK OF TORMTORS OOPS WE LEFT IT IN CAVES HA HA IRONY SUCK IT FAENDRYL" while other documentation points to Ur-Daemons and yet still forthcoming documentation I'm working on will contradict these, quite purposefully. I personally hate OOC history, cause it basically stamps the whole Simu Has Decreed Thusly mark on it and leaves nothing much for your characters to wiggle around in.

Also, random note about Breg war - and it's certainly nothing official: I have no idea what the 'official' stance on it was as most of my involvement in it was during my player years, but I thought that there was some backpeddling late in the story to say Bregendia was an alternate universe/plane/whatever, which kinda fits as a convenient excuse. I don't recall a ban being placed on acknowledging it ICly, if there was, I never knew about it. The only reason it hasn't been put in the timeline or anything is probably because the GMs who ran it are long gone.

~ V
reply

droit

05-03-2010, 05:04 PM

Are you seriously copying every single post by a GM on the officials? This thread is reserved for interesting things, not a repository for every damn thing a NIR ejaculates.

Inspire

05-03-2010, 05:41 PM

I'm just going to respond as someone on the QC team...

The GM who did the alterations is correct (and is also trained in QC) in the number of words that should be in a long description.

We would always rather stick with 12-13 at most, but at a GM's discretion it can reach 15. There are also character counts that we try to keep an eye on, and really anything above 80 and hitting 90 just looks kind of silly whenever it is worn, removed, and so on. Nothing in shops will have more than 60 characters in a long any more.

Like many things in the game, rules evolve over time, and it is the nature of change. That things used to be some way or allowed aren't and have never been a reason for us to continue that way, just like we'll certainly never have any items that "have eyes that pierce your soul" or "black silk sash adorned with numerous metals and ribbons doubtless awarded for acts of conspicuous bravery".

Also, with the advent of creating links in Stormfront, overly long item names were made even more blatant, and led to us trying to trim lengths down a little bit.

It's not meant as personal or to ruin anyone's fun... it just is what it is.

I am very proud of myself as a male for knowing what a cotehardie and a bliaut are, and chopines, and pelisses, marbrinus, bourde, and on and on. The things I have to learn...

- Cirath

"The mind is everything. What you think, you become." ~ Siddhartha

Inspire

05-03-2010, 05:50 PM

I have an old pin worn container which holds a VLA. Currently it's a tunic, but it really doesn't make a whole lot of sense for this particular character to be wearing a tunic in addition to a longcoat, a surcoat, and plate armor. I know gambesons have been introduced as part of the layered clothing system, but I was interested in knowing if it would be possible for this particular item to be altered into a gambeson (even if it isn't layered) or an arming doublet. My guess is that any alterer is going to look at the capacity and say not a chance, but I figured I would get other folks' opinion on it.

In the event that those aren't possible options, if anyone has a better alteration idea which might fly, I would be more than interested in hearing it.

JC
reply

>any alterer is going to look at the capacity and say not a chance

Pretty much. If we alter it, it is going to have to be a noun that reflects its ability to hold so much - ie. cloak, coat, jacket, frock, cape.

~Naionna

I tell you, back in my day, we didn't have tones! We had to speak uphill both ways in 93.7 feet of snow without tongue mittens
reply

I'd certainly feel better about turning a pinworn VLA from a shirt into a surcoat, however, surcoats have a history of holding such a thing. There have been several sold that held medium to large amounts, for example. As for just 'upgrading' as it were in general, that's food for thought, but not something I have ever been instructed was "okay". I'll definitely ask the PTB for clarification, however, just to be fair.

~Naionna

I tell you, back in my day, we didn't have tones! We had to speak uphill both ways in 93.7 feet of snow without tongue mittens
reply

Inspire

05-03-2010, 05:52 PM

>- or have things changed considerably?

Yes, things have changed considerably in the last few years. There is a concerted effort for all of us GMs to be more consistent in our alterations, not just the new folks. You can find the alteration guidelines in game by typing ALTER.

>Is it possible one merchant will do it in the future where others won't?

This is much less likely than it was in the past. QC rules are better spelled out and more stringently enforced than they were several years ago. Now, if one of us makes an alteration that goes against the established guidelines and it is discovered, it will have to be changed. Thus, I wouldn't count on "shopping around" for a different GM to do requests that are outside the guidelines.

~Talisker

>I am under the impression what I wanted done might well be a blink for someone with more experience as a merchant.

I'm a pretty experienced merchant and I would not have made "dwarven" armor either, for the same reasons mentioned. The aid bag, I would probably have asked that it be given further description such as 'herbal' or 'medicinal' to distinguish it further. However, if I had any question, whatsoever, I would ask my fellow staff members on our channel of communication tools and if no answer were forthcoming there, I would decline. I would rather err on the side of caution, than make something for someone and have to go back and ruin it for them by changing it after the fact because I'd messed up. It is a hard thing to do sometimes, to tell a player no, because we DO want you to have the things you envision for your characters and we DO like to see you happy. However, there are bigger pictures to consider when merchanting and rules that we are all striving to follow to make things more consistent all around.

As for previously made items, it has been said many times and usually does nothing more than irritate players, but the truth is, we made mistakes in the past and now we are correcting that by not repeating it. We could go back around and change everyone's previously made alteration that breaks rules, but it would be a mass of chaos to do so and we prefer to just be consistent going forward. So yes, you may see 'aid bags' or 'dwarven armor' or 'elven chainmail' or 'a warriors cloak' or 'a longsword that bespeaks of death and is engraved along its length with pulsating runes of power and destruction' but that doesn't mean they will be made again. Its always best to just check ALTER in game before determining what you'd like to have done or request, so that these things can be understood and hopefully we avoid being unhappy at the end of an event. We never WANT you to be unhappy, I promise.

~Naionna

I tell you, back in my day, we didn't have tones! We had to speak uphill both ways in 93.7 feet of snow without tongue mittens

Drew

05-03-2010, 05:55 PM

massive pointless Naos post

You must think this is cute and you get a giggle out of annoying people.

Inspire

05-03-2010, 06:03 PM

<< More Lornon items. More! In specific, subtle symbols and whatnot. (Eorgina please.) >>

Hmm...I just had a neat idea for a shop and doing Lornon-themed stuff inside could fit really well.

If anyone has specific ideas for Lornon-themed items or scripted items or whatever, feel free to e-mail me with the subject "EG LORNON IDEAS" and I'll take some notes.

This MIGHT not make it in for this year, so just be warned. YAY!

--
Naos

I'm immune to fire! Now with more banhammer! You sense the bond between you and your grey cat grow stronger.

Inspire

05-03-2010, 06:15 PM

<<The coding in DR is cleaner version then the coding in GS. While both games use very similar coding systems, because the one in DR is a refinement of the one in GS it's easier to work with.>>

Both DR and GS run on the latest version of the IFE. At any rate, this discussion is way off topic and I've encouraged it, but no more. Let's all stay on topic.

SGM Sleken
reply

Some Rogue

05-03-2010, 06:24 PM

Are you seriously copying every single post by a GM on the officials? This thread is reserved for interesting things, not a repository for every damn thing a NIR ejaculates.

Of course he is. This is his way of getting back at the PC for the whole skinning thing. You notice it started right after that episode.

droit

05-03-2010, 06:26 PM

How childish.

caelric

05-03-2010, 06:27 PM

E-RAGE!!!11!!1!!!1oneone!!11!one!

Inspire

05-03-2010, 06:32 PM

>Their continued silence on this makes me think they believe it does exist in a player-accessible location. Would be nice if they provided some guidance.

Stringae cactus does exist in a player-accessible location (though it is not a very big area). It is located west of the DragonSpine, in a desert-like area.

Coase

Some Rogue

05-03-2010, 06:37 PM

Last post in the skinning thread 4-28-10, first post of your spam in this thread, 4-28-10. Just a coincidence!

Inspire

05-03-2010, 06:38 PM

>>I'm with everyone else. That's a terrible solution, Oscuro. What's with the arbitrary stubbornness? Please come up with something else.

Naos already suggested what could be done on the GM end of things. I'm merely offering an alternative that currently exists that's within the power of players. If you'd rather just sit on your hands and wait for a new recipe to be written, approved, implemented and then discovered, that's fine, too.

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team
reply

>>Oh noes, Oscuro couldn't stand to admit he was wrong and possibly his idea wasn't the best -- not when he spent so many posts telling me how lazy, foolish, and incompetent I must be as a Rift hunter.

First, I never said you were foolish or an incompetent Rift hunter. I may have hinted that you were lazy because you were hunting Teras and not even trying for these silver fangs that you're willing to bug people for but not even try to get yourself. I did explain to you why you weren't seeing the silver fangs drop, which you either do not understand, choose to disbelieve, or are intentionally ignoring the fact that silver fangs do exist to further your own aim at an easy (for you, but not the people who volunteer their time to develop for the game) solution.

I'm sorry that you're upset about this situation, but rudely claiming I can't admit when I'm wrong is childish at best. I fully admit that the solution I presented isn't easy for you, but it is something you can accomplish. You can't write a new recipe, get it approved by SGMs, or implement it into the game. If you'd rather wait until all that stuff is done, which could be a very long time because a simple dye recipe is hardly top priority, then please do so, but don't insult me because you're unhappy that I gave you a difficult yet plausible interim solution.

>>silver fangs do not exist

They most certainly do.

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team

>>Why is it people who have hunted the Rift for literally years upon years have never seen one?

>>Siwas, tired of all the combative sarcasm over this

That wasn't sarcasm. They are literally in the treasure system. I know. I checked. It's not hard for a GM to check. And I certainly know what I'm doing. The reason why players haven't seen them has been explained - it's because the Rift is underhunted, so the treasure system is only spitting out higher valued items. It's actually rather easy to shift the treasure system just enough to get a non-zero probability of having silver fangs drop. Single players do this in other hunting areas rather often.

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team

>>So just because I am on Teras today, I MUST have never hunted the Rift ever, in the past year, to try to resolve this situation, right? Do you monitor my activities 24/7? Do I need to post logs of my Rift hunting to prove I am not lazy and willing to acquire silver fangs for myself? More relevantly, why should anyone question whether I hunt for the fangs myself or ask friends to do it for me? How do you know I'm not making silvery dye for friends? This line of reasoning is just mindboggling, and I could complain to feedback, but it's just simply not worth my time.

No, I don't. I just made the observation that you weren't trying now, but were asking for a solution now. I never suggested that you've never hunted the Rift. I was talking about present day.

If you are seriously dissatisfied with my ability to reason, I do suggest you contact my superiors (GM Mestys or Sirina) or feedback.

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team

Inspire

05-03-2010, 06:39 PM

Last post in the skinning thread 4-28-10, first post of your spam in this thread, 4-28-10. Just a coincidence!

I started hunting and resting while you absorb is rather boring.

Try reading these, you might learn something.

Inspire

05-03-2010, 06:49 PM

I suppose I should clarify; I took issue with someone saying 'they guess' when a GM explicitly stated that's not how it worked.

A halfling wizard would be a perfect candidate to test the CS/TD theory. So quickly, in fact, that's why I thought CS/TD wasn't plausible. Additionally, a fully stacked GWE is nearly impossible to ward with 522 Bardic CS and I can 1005 to sleep almost ever time.

/shrug

-- dan/gnimble

>Additionally, a fully stacked GWE is nearly impossible to ward with 522 Bardic CS and I can 1005 to sleep almost ever time.

I once posted on the boards how I could web a griffin every time. Guess what happened.

Sounds to me like you just put 1005 on the nerf list.

Virilneus

>>I once posted on the boards how I could web a griffin every time. Guess what happened.

That was also a bug, which you noted since the formula is posted in the spell description.

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team

Asrial

05-03-2010, 10:08 PM

Don't forget this one...

.

SYLVANCODE: Can the spell 220 be replaced with a spell that actually works?

ESTILD: No.

Asrial

05-03-2010, 10:09 PM

Here's another...

.

SYLVANCODE: I also wasn't AFK or in it for a long time. I cast 220 so I could go pee and when I returned it had spit me out and I was dead.

OSCURO: You pee at the keyboard?

Inspire

05-03-2010, 10:14 PM

Here's another...

.

SYLVANCODE: I also wasn't AFK or in it for a long time. I cast 220 so I could go pee and when I returned it had spit me out and I was dead.

OSCURO: You pee at the keyboard?

I pee on my keyboard

Fallen

05-04-2010, 09:58 AM

>>It's been a while since this update went live in Wehnimer's, but it seems that Spirit Servants (and I'm assuming familiars) still are forbidden to enter the Voln courtyard in River's Rest. I don't know about other towns but I am going to assume that Oscuro never got around to checking the other towns...

I just now fixed RR, Teras, Icemule, Pinefar and Ta'Vaalor's Voln courtyards (or equivalent) to allow spirit servants and other types of familiars. Sorry for the delay.

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team

http://www.play.net/forums/messages.asp?forum=102&category=20&topic=6&message=3328

Fallen

05-04-2010, 09:04 PM

>>Anyone...anyone at all know who the Voln guru is?

GM Coase is in charge of societies.

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team
*

http://www.play.net/forums/messages.asp?forum=102&category=29&topic=23&message=6943

Inspire

05-05-2010, 04:43 AM

The following are NOT yet implemented, but are the plans that we have for stealth CMANs. I wanted to post them now so that people can plan for the impending annual fixskills on May 20th (which these updates will almost assuredly NOT be ready by) and also to discuss them.

The general goals of these changes are to provide a desirable CMAN build for Rogues going the standard stealth route and to greater facilitate hiding as a defense, so that Rogues can feasibly stay in the shadows for more of their time in the field, and thus, rely less on heavy armor. Along with the recent addition of CMAN Divert, I believe the following changes will achieve these goals.

Silent Strike -
The base chance to successfully remain hidden will be increased. The contribution of both Ambush ranks and Stalk & Hide to success will also both increase. Having the Armored Stealth armor specialization active will also add to success. The success chance will no longer be capped at 95%, but 99%.

Silent Strike's stamina cost will be reduced from 25 to 20.

Cutthroat & Subdue -
If the Rogue also has equivalent or superior training in Silent Strike, the Rogue will attempt to remain hidden when performing the respective maneuver. For example, if you have 4 ranks of Cutthroat and 4 or more ranks of Silent Strike, you will have a chance at staying hidden when performing the Cutthroat maneuver using the same success formula as Silent Strike. For this determination, 50+ guild ranks of Subdue require 5 ranks of Silent Strike for the chance to remain hidden.

Shadow Mastery -
The CMP (CMAN Point) cost for this CMAN will be reduced from 3/5/7/9/11 to 2/4/6/8/10 for Rogues and from 4/7/10/13/16 to 3/6/9/12/15 for Rangers, thus a reduction of 1 CMP per rank. As an aside, Monks are no longer candidates for Shadow Mastery as stealth is not meant to be one of their main fortes.

Vanish -
A new CMAN will be available...

Vanish
Available to: Rogues
Stamina Cost: 25 + 1 per second of RT remaining without Shadow Mastery active, per two seconds of RT with Shadow Mastery active
Prerequisite: Rank 4 of Shadow Mastery
CMP Cost: 4/8/12
You immediately attempt to hide with 0 RT. At rank 2, you are able to hide while in 5 seconds or less of RT. At rank 3, you can hide while in any amount of RT.

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team

http://www.play.net/forums/messages.asp?forum=102&category=28&topic=2&message=3988

Celephais

05-05-2010, 09:34 AM

Wow! Those are some really impressive buffs to stealth rogues. Immediate re-hiding is ridiculous, especially for PvP.

Fallen

05-05-2010, 09:35 AM

Wow! Those are some really impressive buffs to stealth rogues. Immediate re-hiding is ridiculous, especially for PvP.

Pretty crazy. First ..well, anything, I have seen that can ignore RT outside of Shadowdeath vambraces, and those have room requirements.

grossm

05-05-2010, 11:30 AM

They should also update stun maneuvers to work with vanish the same way that silent strike will work with cutthroat and subdue.

Mathari

05-05-2010, 12:14 PM

Oscuro for president!

Also, I've been skeptical of claims that Warden had a sort of stranglehold on game development, but geez... After all the recent changes and proposed changes, I don't think I am anymore.

caelric

05-05-2010, 12:19 PM

Yeah, however much the GM's are denying it, saying that many of the ideas came from Warden, or were already approved by him, it is suspicious that all the changes are happening shortly after Warden left.

Whatever the reason, it makes me happy that this ancient, text based game is getting improvements. Apparently I am easy to please.

Fallen

05-05-2010, 02:18 PM

>>Curious if this was tongue-in-cheek or serious.

Mostly tongue-in-cheek, but there are some pretty cool things coming down the pipe. I suggest you attend Simucon if you're interested in the latest. :)

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team

So, to state the obvious, no monks until at least after Simucon. How far away is that?

Fallen

05-05-2010, 02:18 PM

>>If this change IS implemented, will my rogue and ranger with this skill have to undo all their CM ranks to see the decrease in cost, or will they automatically get extra CMan points added to their unused total?

Automagically.

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team

That's good and bad. I guess you could have hoped for a free CMAN fixskills out of the deal, but atleast not having to migrate everything.

StrayRogue

05-05-2010, 02:20 PM

More points is good. I'm already pondering where to free up the space for Divert, Defense, and Vanish now.

Fallen

05-05-2010, 02:21 PM

More points is good. I'm already pondering where to free up the space for Divert, Defense, and Vanish now.

For any CMANs you have for defensive purposes, you can drop a rank and Combat Defense will make up the difference. Of course, then you wont have above average defense against them. Still, might be an option for you.

Inspire

05-05-2010, 02:25 PM

<<The mechanics for opening boxes either inflict heavy penalties for having the box in hand, or REQUIRE the box to be on the ground. This is not an avoidable risk. >>

Can you explain these "penalties" to me? Or how the system would ever require you to have the box on the ground?

Solomon

"The probability of someone making a mathematical formulation on a non-mathematical subject is inversely proportional to its usefulness."
- Brust's Law of Mathematical Formulations

https://www.play.net/forums/messages.asp?forum=102&category=8&topic=3&message=46684

(Apparently the haze is stealing loot?)

Fallen

05-05-2010, 02:27 PM

I have had the haze grab loot off of the ground before I was even out of combat RT to pick it up. Stuff like jewelry trinkets, coins, and clothing drops. It definitely has worth, was only there for less than 10 seconds with me in the room, and still vanishes.

Drew

05-05-2010, 02:54 PM

I take a few things away from this.

1. They are changing shadow mastery (again) and not making it passive. This makes no sense, it should be a passive skill.

2. If you are going to play a stealth rogue with these cmans you probably don't want to be in Sunfist.

Inspire

05-05-2010, 04:36 PM

>>Of course, none of this really makes a rogue want to wear lighter armor.

It's not explicit - it's implicit. These changes are to ensure Rogues can remain in the shadows longer, so they don't need the armor, not that they're prevented from using it. By forgoing heavy armor, they'd have more TPs to train in CM to get the CMP for these skills, to increase their stalk/hide and ambushing ranks and PF ranks to get more stamina.

The ideas I have for "in the open" builds for Rogues that follow concepts like an artful dodger or a swashbuckler include more explicit means to discourage heavy armor. The dev team is still in discussion about these, though.

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team

Inspire

05-05-2010, 04:37 PM

>>What is NOT fantasy is to have one rule some of the time, and another rule the rest of the time.

That's absolutely ridiculous. That's like saying "before Miracle, no one could raise themself from the dead, so Miracle breaks the rules of game design so it's inappropriate." Given appropriate balancing conditions (like the CMP and stamina costs of Vanish), any "rule" can be broken. I think you simply suffer from a lack of imagination, or perhaps envy.

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team

Wow funny. If you don't agree with the GM, he gets to be rude to you. That's a surefire way to keep customers.

Inspire

05-05-2010, 04:41 PM

>>You can't just apply a cost to rule breaking and call it good. You can't disrespect game mechanics like this.

You've apparently not played many games. In Dungeons and Dragons 4th Edition, for example, one of the three cardinal rules of the game is "specific trumps general," meaning that general rules are meant to be broken by specific rules. Vanish is a specific rule which trumps the general "roundtime" rule.

>>Riddle me this Oscuro, why not allow Haste to be 0 rt again? Don't pawn it off on Naos and say it is his decision, I'm asking your opinion. Is it a cost issue? Must we merely need to increase the cost enough and anything is okay?

Haste is hardly comparable. Haste applies to nearly every single action in the game and lasts for a duration of one minute. If it reduced all actions to 0 RT in that time, it would, of course, be far too powerful. It's far too powerful in its current incarnation. Vanish, on the other hand, is simply one action, no duration, one single attempt to hide, and every single activation costs a significant amount of stamina. Also, there is a substantial CMP investment for only this ability, while Haste is merely a power you gain along the way to higher spells.

>>I think it is very small of you to even suggest it.

I think it's small of you to reprimand me for the majority of my additions to the game. Disagreement is fine, but use some tact when you do. Otherwise, don't whine when you get it in return.

>>What is next? CMAN FIREBALL? CMAN RAISEDEAD?

I can't wait to hear your comments on what the Monk CML looks like.

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team

https://www.play.net/forums/messages.asp?forum=102&category=28&topic=2&message=4007

Inspire

05-05-2010, 04:45 PM

Inspire

05-05-2010, 04:47 PM

>>Uhhh... maybe plate armor's maneuvering penalty needs to be revisited? (So that it's much more difficult to hide while wearing it, that is, since CMan Vanish is "a standard hide check" as we've been told.)

The problem is, the armor maneuver penalty has never been applied to hide checks. I don't exactly agree with the status quo, but it's going to remain, at least until lighter armor has been improved.

>>Or hey, since there's a concern about "why not just use plate and still get these CMans and use them" and also a corresponding concern about how much stamina the CMans take... make it harder to get stamina. I mean heck, you're carting around a bunch of armor weight, your stamina should be recovering less quickly.
(Translation: stamina recovery gains a bonus == 1 minus Armor Group (so Plate in AG5 will be a -4 bonus [and negative bonus == penalty]); the more you're wearing, the less stamina you get back to use for CMans.)

While good in principal, this is an undesired penalty for the classes that rely on stamina and are expected to be in heavy armor, like Warriors, Paladins, and to a lesser extent, Bards.

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team

https://www.play.net/forums/messages.asp?forum=102&category=28&topic=2&message=4019

Nuc

05-05-2010, 04:50 PM

cman fireball = hadouken? Monks 4tw!

Inspire

05-05-2010, 04:50 PM

>>Perhaps an armor augmentation for rogues that the lighter armor class you are in, you can adjust it so your muscles recover quicker?

An interesting idea, but with Mind over Body (1213), Monks will be the stamina cost reducing Square.

>>However, look at manuevers such as Silenstrike (the proposed lower to 20 stamina), Cutthroat (20 stamina? why wouldn't I just kill it), Subdue (20 stamina!? WHY?)

>>It is a great manuever, but tossing in the activation of smastery and it's ridiculous cooldown time, and your shadow rogue is simply not going to have the stamina to use it.

I believe these stamina costs are in line considering the power of the maneuvers involved. If anything, Cutthroat's CMP cost might be reduced when we review all the hostile maneuver's costs, but there's no guarantee.

>>And lastly: Provides a bonus to Stealth rolls equal to (Rank * 2 * (5 - Armor Group)).

>>Robes at rank 1: 1 * 2 * (5-0). 10 bonus? I mean obviously we don't know how the stealth die work, but so I cannot translate into how much of a big deal that may or may not be. Keeping in mind that is fully optimized in robes.

Robes are AG 1. Type CMAN HELP EMASTERY and it will give you a listing of what each AG is. Rank 5 of Armored Stealth in robes is a +40 to the hide roll. This is equivalent to a 40 bonus in the Stalk & Hide skill for the hide roll. Silent Strike (and its accompanying effect in Cutthroat & Subdue) use a slightly different formula, but bonuses from Armored Stealth are proportional to what they are in the hide formula.

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team

https://www.play.net/forums/messages.asp?forum=102&category=28&topic=2&message=4032

Inspire

05-05-2010, 04:57 PM

>>Interesting that a profession with a spell is considered the stamina cost reducing Square and the heavily trained physical classes, Warriors and Rogues, are not.

Monks are, by definition, Squares. They have access to two minor spell circles. If you care to discuss this further, we can in the Monk folder.

>>Will I be able to invoke 1213? :-)

Yes, if you play a Monk. ;) Also, it's a group spell, so if you group up w/ a Monk, you can get your stamina costs reduced.

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team

https://www.play.net/forums/messages.asp?forum=102&category=28&topic=2&message=4044

Inspire

05-05-2010, 04:58 PM

>>It is never okay.

At this point, since you're making foolish absolute statements, it's obvious you're either dense, or arguing for arguments sake, so I'm done.

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team

https://www.play.net/forums/messages.asp?forum=102&category=28&topic=2&message=4045

This topic is starting to disintegrate into off topic conversations or deviations, lets refocus and keep the personal attacks out of it.

Clemment
MOD-GSCLEMENT@Play.net
GEMSTONE IV FORUMS

https://www.play.net/forums/messages.asp?forum=102&category=28&topic=2&message=4048

I wonder if that applies to GM's?

Inspire

05-05-2010, 04:59 PM

>>Oscuro, do you believe an appropriate measure applied to the maneuver would be an additional 3-5 seconds of RT added for the activation of CM Vanish? It would fit that it would take the rogue atleast some time to hide, as it does even under the best of circumstances, and this maneuver is activated under some of the worst. The hide RT of Vanish could be further lessened by having Smastery running.

This was considered during the design process (standard hide RT), but was decided against since it destroys one of the uses of the maneuver, which is a method of marginally speeding up stealth combat.

>>Can any status effect, stat loss, injury, etc other than Slow increase the amount of time it takes to hide? If not, then I would agree that is appropriate. Otherwise, it would make sense for the RT to scale appropriately.

Once you hit a relatively low threshold of Stalk & Hide ranks, the roundtime for hiding is almost guaranteed to be 3 seconds.

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team

https://www.play.net/forums/messages.asp?forum=102&category=28&topic=2&message=4083

Inspire

05-05-2010, 05:24 PM

>I dropped silvers on the ground in a safe room

No such thing as a safe room, honestly. And we don't replace things that you drop of your own accord, then lose to the janitor. I thought it was due to a crash, where we do replace items (even boxes), not just while you were out hunting it randomly disappeared. However, as far as why we don't allow silvers to be registered, I'm not really sure. I would imagine it is just because the system is set up to only register substantial items you can hold in your hand and silvers aren't set up to work that way. Perhaps they will allow registration of silvers going forward, somehow, and that would be great. But it still wouldn't allow them to be replaced when during normal game mechanics, you drop them on the ground with a familiar while you hunt 3 rooms away. Heck, another player could have wandered into the room and picked them up in a situation like that and been perfectly within their rights as its on the ground and open for taking.

Also, please don't ASSIST on the familiar. You already know that isn't going to do you any good and it would be a waste of staff time in Platinum. If you are really that upset about the familiar (and that intent on proving your point with it), a letter to feedback would be best.

~Naionna

I tell you, back in my day, we didn't have tones! We had to speak uphill both ways in 93.7 feet of snow without tongue mittens

https://www.play.net/forums/messages.asp?forum=102&category=8&topic=3&message=46692

<<Loss of parry DS, loss of block DS, and reduced dodge DS. If you dont have enough DS, when the critter hits you, you die.>>

Ok, I understand DS, but the obvious question is...

Why are you trying to disarm and pick in hunting areas anyway? Seems like these penalties are only "forced" when you're forcing them.

Or am I missing something?

Solomon

"The probability of someone making a mathematical formulation on a non-mathematical subject is inversely proportional to its usefulness."
- Brust's Law of Mathematical Formulations

http://www.myspace.com/gemstoneiv

Inspire

05-05-2010, 05:26 PM

Just to toss my two cents in, I'd say that portals are important to Platinum because we have a community of 30-50 active players. While Prime's population has dropped, it is no where near that low in numbers and I really don't see the need to use portals.

~Naionna

I tell you, back in my day, we didn't have tones! We had to speak uphill both ways in 93.7 feet of snow without tongue mittens
reply

https://www.play.net/forums/messages.asp?forum=102&category=10&topic=14&message=857

Inspire

05-05-2010, 05:29 PM

>>Curious if this was tongue-in-cheek or serious.

Mostly tongue-in-cheek, but there are some pretty cool things coming down the pipe. I suggest you attend Simucon if you're interested in the latest. :)

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team

https://www.play.net/forums/messages.asp?forum=102&category=33&topic=2&message=1089

Fallen

05-06-2010, 08:49 AM

>>Thoughts on the state of Ranger Cmans?

It should be noted that the review of hostile CMANs is really only in regards to:

1) Creatures' natural resistance/immunity to some maneuvers. Far more creatures are immune to CMs than spells, and it destroys squares' entire "spell lists." The impact of this will be reduced.

2) Following the above, the CMP cost of many hostile CMs will be reduced to make them more enticing to train.

I do not anticipate looking at changing other aspects of maneuvers, like availability.

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team
http://www.play.net/forums/messages.asp?forum=102&category=27&topic=2&message=1530

BriarFox

05-06-2010, 09:05 AM

Christ. Stop posting all this bullshit, Inspire. It's almost all irrelevant.

Fallen

05-06-2010, 12:13 PM

>>Oscuro, while you're looking at critter resistances/immunities to CMANs, will you also be looking at critter resistances/immunities to guild skills, particularly Cheapshots?

Yes. Offensive guild skills are CMANs (with the except of warcries).

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team
https://www.play.net/forums/messages.asp?forum=102&category=28&topic=2&message=4152

Iamnaeth

05-06-2010, 12:33 PM

I appreciate you posting all this stuff. I don't have time to read through the officials so this is great.

Christ. Stop posting all this bullshit, Inspire. It's almost all irrelevant.

Fallen

05-06-2010, 04:39 PM

This is the culmination of about 50 pages of argument on the officials concerning the janitor and the "haze" mechanics.

SUNDYN2Hey Estild--if you have any time can you check on the whole warning thing? I don't remember ever seeing it.

Yes, there does appear to be a problem with it. I'll be fixing that shortly.

GameMaster Estild
Cleric/Empath Team

The warning should now be functioning. Set your highlights as I outlined before.

GameMaster Estild
Cleric/Empath Team

Mathari

05-06-2010, 04:46 PM

I appreciate you posting all this stuff. I don't have time to read through the officials so this is great.
I gotta side with BriarFox on this one. I don't read through the officials either (though I do check them from time to time), and this thread used to be nice for that reason, because interesting official posts would be copied here. Back in those days, the thread would pop up in "New Posts," and I'd know that something interesting was happening and to check it out. Now, though, with all these insignificant posts being spammed here, that's not the case; the thread pops up in "New Posts," but I suspect that it's probably just Inspire posting something unimportant, and I lose the urge to even look at it. It's defeating the thread's purpose, I think.

Inspire

05-06-2010, 04:47 PM

I appreciate you posting all this stuff. I don't have time to read through the officials so this is great.

Thanks!

Briarfox, GFY

Fallen

05-06-2010, 04:49 PM

A good rule of thumb is not to bother X-posting something when a GM is expressing an opinion on an area where they don't have any control.

Mathari

05-06-2010, 04:52 PM

A good rule of thumb is not to bother X-posting something when a GM is expressing an opinion on an area where they don't have any control.
Beyond that, don't just post crap that consists solely of GMS saying things like, "At this point, since you're making foolish absolute statements, it's obvious you're either dense, or arguing for arguments sake, so I'm done," or, "This topic is starting to disintegrate into off topic conversations or deviations, lets refocus and keep the personal attacks out of it."

I doubt that many of us, if any of us, care that a mod has decided that a thread on the official boards is going off topic.

Ryvicke

05-06-2010, 04:52 PM

This is the culmination of about 50 pages of argument on the officials concerning the janitor and the "haze" mechanics.

Heh! God I want that thread to end, that was my last ditch effort.

BriarFox

05-06-2010, 04:56 PM

Thanks!

Briarfox, GFY

Sorry, the bathroom's occupied since you keep shoving sticks up your ass. Stop using this thread as a soapbox for your nonsensical arguments with GMs.

Drew

05-06-2010, 05:11 PM

A good rule of thumb is not to bother X-posting something when a GM is expressing an opinion on an area where they don't have any control.

I've just somewhat solved the problem by adding Inspire to my ignore list. If by some chance he happens to post a GM post with actual merit, repost it :)

Lulfas

05-06-2010, 09:31 PM

This is the culmination of about 50 pages of argument on the officials concerning the janitor and the "haze" mechanics.

Worth mentioning that before these messages of fixing the bug, we got

The haze/whirlwind event is working correctly. Disagreeing with the implementation is not the same thing as a bug.

Inspire

05-07-2010, 03:28 PM

>>When I'm unencumbered and stand up, without RT, it doesn't equate to a battle system

It actually does. Being prone is a typical status ailment for combat and the STAND verb can cause RT if someone has a high enough action penalty on their armor, regardless of encumbrance.

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team
reply

https://www.play.net/forums/messages.asp?forum=102&category=28&topic=2&message=4186

Inspire

05-07-2010, 03:38 PM

>>Any chance that the ability to duplicate other locks than their own creations will get added while you are adjusting the code in this area?

Sorry, that's an intentional restriction.

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team
reply

>What's the reasoning behind that? I can't think of how that could be abused.

When I asked Ildran, he said he wasn't going to change it because it was too deeply imbedded in the code. LM LOCK CREATE uses the name of the locksmith in the code of the lock it creates as a way of making the lock unique. When you try to duplicate, your name gets mangled up with the name of the original lockmaker and it only produces an exact duplicate if you are the original smith.

The main use of create locks is for sorcerers who have to have locked containers to phase, and the current implementation "locks" them into using the same smith if they just want the one key to fit all their containers. I discovered this because a sorcerer had carefully got an extra lock assembly made up, and kept it so that it could be duplicated when he acquired another container. I tried and failed to duplicate it, and didn't find out why until Ildran made one of his occasional appearances with the reason. The original smith was still playing, but in a different town, so I think the sorcerer got his container locked eventually.

Inspire

05-07-2010, 03:39 PM

I believe North Market in Solhaven and Dragonspine and Krodera on Teras are both stealable spots unless someone puts up their own Minor Sanctuary. It looks like the dais is the only major gathering spot that's a natural sanctuary, and GM Itzel, the town guru, assures me that it's in place because of behavioral problems from (non-theft related) griefing.

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team

Just thought it was funny.

Inspire

05-07-2010, 04:27 PM

>>OH! I almost forgot! I know you said you weren't looking at anything but CMP costs, Oscuro, but could you please please please review MFIRE?? It's the only archer specific CMAN, and I believe it has been universally deemed "crap." I've heard of maybe 2 or 3 people who use it--in 10+ years of playing. That should be a sign.

I do think there should be more archery CMANs. Also, the CML has only been around for about 6.5 years, just FYI.

>>Either reduce the RT or let it shoot aimed shots.

I personally think the RT is far too low on regular archery let alone multiple shots at once. And letting loose a volley of aimed attacks is far too strong. If this isn't possible with MSTRIKE (which it shouldn't be), it most certainly should not be possible with the already objectively superior ranged fighting style.

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team

https://www.play.net/forums/messages.asp?forum=102&category=27&topic=2&message=1536

Oscuro is going to NERF ranged!

droit

05-07-2010, 04:36 PM

Bleh. Why don't you just leave that ranger thread alone, Inspire. I think the whole thing is just doing more harm than good.

Ryvicke

05-07-2010, 04:43 PM

Bleh. Why don't you just leave that ranger thread alone, Inspire. I think the whole thing is just doing more harm than good.

.

Inspire

05-07-2010, 05:33 PM

>>Fair?

You're right. We're intentionally releasing Rogue CMs just so Rangers can be upset.

Honestly, the last thing you want is try to goad me into looking at Semis at cap. I feel there is a serious balance issue there where Semis are capable of having the best of both the Square and Pure worlds once you've lost the restriction of TPs/level.

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team

Wow, nice threat.

StrayRogue

05-07-2010, 05:41 PM

He's 100% right though.

Inspire

05-07-2010, 05:51 PM

He's 100% right though.

Everyone can be powerful at cap/post cap.

He's 100% right because you can say it about any profession.

He's just being a jackass.

Fallen

05-07-2010, 05:53 PM

Semi's are dominant post cap. Bards insanely so.

Danical

05-07-2010, 05:58 PM

Everyone can be powerful at cap/post cap.

He's 100% right because you can say it about any profession.

He's just being a jackass.

He's not; Semi's are positioned to be way batter post cap.

It's insanely easy to max out your combat skills AT cap as a square/pure. 2x CM/weapon [square] or 3x spells [pure]. Granted the pure can pick up lores which helps. Bards, for example, can pick up capabilities they weren't able to before like going from 1x to 2x CM or adding MnE to get +50 from 425 or getting telepathy for 1007. Squares and, to a lesser extent, pures can really only grow laterally at Cap whereas Semis can grow both laterally and vertically.

StrayRogue

05-07-2010, 06:02 PM

Semi's get the best of both worlds at cap, as it were.

grenthor

05-07-2010, 06:07 PM

He's just being a jackass.

http://www.byrnerobotics.com/forum/uploads/JoeHollon/2010-02-14_202320_KettleCallingPotBlack.jpg

Inspire

05-07-2010, 06:47 PM

He's not; Semi's are positioned to be way batter post cap.

It's insanely easy to max out your combat skills AT cap as a square/pure. 2x CM/weapon [square] or 3x spells [pure]. Granted the pure can pick up lores which helps. Bards, for example, can pick up capabilities they weren't able to before like going from 1x to 2x CM or adding MnE to get +50 from 425 or getting telepathy for 1007. Squares and, to a lesser extent, pures can really only grow laterally at Cap whereas Semis can grow both laterally and vertically.

I see that as an inherent part of the semi profession's. It may be out of whack eventually but they should be a strong combination of the two.

Should there be more benefits to being a square square or a pure pure or should they experiment and find a new "fit" ie NERF for semis?

Danical

05-07-2010, 09:06 PM

I see that as an inherent part of the semi profession's. It may be out of whack eventually but they should be a strong combination of the two.

Should there be more benefits to being a square square or a pure pure or should they experiment and find a new "fit" ie NERF for semis?

You're not getting it; they simply don't balance the game for post-cap characters.

Semis are an average combination, not a "strong" combination of magic and physical combat. That's the point, as a semi, you're forced to make choices and sacrifices and post cap exp alleviates the sacrifice.

Archigeek

05-07-2010, 09:46 PM

I warned about that when they implemented the cap actually. Ah well, it's still better than it was without a cap.

Sylvan Dreams

05-09-2010, 01:07 AM

Itzel on adding more playershopd to Ta'Illistim.

<<Itzel is there anyway you can expand the shop area a few rooms to allow more people to own shops please?

Without elaboration, yes.

Itzel

Team Plat
Forest Gnome Guru
Elven Nations Guru

Jaired says, "Stop standing in the way of the artistic picture that I am trying to paint through WORDS."

As soon as I feel confident enough to announce something, I will. That isn't really elaboration though, that's my general policy on all announcements that are EN related.

I don't talk about projects until I'm sure they're a reality.

<3
Itzel

Team Plat
Forest Gnome Guru
Elven Nations Guru

Jaired says, "Stop standing in the way of the artistic picture that I am trying to paint through WORDS."

Fallen

05-11-2010, 05:49 PM

I doubt we'll ever see a change to the limit on major projects. Remember, also, that this limit is per account, not even per character. It's a deliberate effort to curtail the inflow of better-than-4x equipment to a reasonable pace.

<< With this much of a delay between items why are we limited to just one? >> ALTIERIN

If there were no limit, one could take one hundred or more 4x items and start as many 5x projects. At this point, the failure rate basically means nothing. Even if you lose five or ten of those projects to catastrophic failure, you still end up with dozens more 5x items than were previous available. Continue through 6x and 7x, and at the end of multiple months you now have 50 or more additional 7x items floating around due to your efforts. Now realize that while it might take you specifically six months or more to complete the enchantment, you are not the only player doing so. (More on numbers later.) Multiply that 50 by every other player doing something similar, and in a few months literally every character in the game has 7x equipment.

<< Can't we use lores or spell rank thresholds... >> Ibid

We've tossed around the idea of reducing temper times with appropriate lore training. This might still come to pass.

<< Amazing weapons spawn daily now in the current treasure system. So theres no problem generating great weapons randomly all day every day. But allowing a wizard to enchant say 2 weapons from 6 to 7x in a 3 month time span would be a game balance issue? >> Ibid

It doesn't generate as many high end items as you might expect. I'm fairly certain it will never generate anything better than 5x in terms of enchantment, as generated items derive their bonus from their material, with few exceptions. You won't see a mithril item generated with a plus better than 5, for example. (GM Strathspey can correct me on this if I'm off the mark.)

<< What is unfortunate is they do not see this "no more than 1 major enchant" rule as enough of a balancing factor to not further penalize enchanting projects. Despite being able to only do one at a time, enchants of enhancive items beyond 4x are often impossible due to added restrictions. This seems silly to me. All they did was remove the theoretical cap, and replace it with one that is unobtainable due to training limitations. If Vrannar can't do certain enchants, no one can. >> CORDELIA

Enchanting some enhancive items is extremely difficult, yes. This is by design. Some enhancive qualities, particularly on auction quality items, are above and beyond what you'd find out in the wilds, which is what we intend to be enchanted. Whether or not the item is at, beyond, or under 4x doesn't actually impact the difficulty as much as the enhancive benefits do. Most of these impossible enchanting projects wouldn't be any more feasibly for player enchanting at 0x even. Again, that's by design. There WILL be items that are effectively not enchantable. This doesn't mean the ability to enchant enhancives is defacto useless.

<< I'd like to know how many enchanted pieces actually do enter the game in any given month. >> SYLVANCODE

I have numbers for player enchanting in particular. This doesn't count items entering the game with various bonuses by other means. In the month of April there were 4757 completed enchanting projects of 4x or lower. There were 415 projects of 5x or better completed, one of which was an 8x project. We had a total of 197 failures overall; I don't track stats on individual failures.

As far as trends go, the average numbers have been pretty stable over the last year. We have an average of 55 7x projects, 130 6x projects, and 250 5x projects completed successfully per month over the last year.

<< But I think what the person who brought up enhancements was referring to was the restrictions were set so high that even Vrannar had trouble doing it successfully in a higher enchant item. If it is difficult for him... I doubt I will ever be able to do it. >> ALTIERIN

If we're referring to the project I'm thinking of, the item in question had a very substantial enhancive benefit. The greater the benefit, the more difficult the project. Some items will be too difficult for players to do, and some will not. You won't know until you try.

<< Seems logical to me. If there were 500 active enchanting Wizards when the 1 major project limit was rolled in, and there are 250 active enchanting Wizards now, why should they not be able to enchant 2 major projects? >> RIMALON

A dropping population is argument for less in-flow, not more. If we have half the number of active enchanting wizards today, then it's likely that we also have half the overall population of players. It's proportional. I'm not convinced that we have a lack of enchanted stuff flowing in given the numbers I see.

<< I believe Naos' prospective change was to become instead, "pour cast pour cast pour cast pour cast pour cast pour cast pour cast wait a LONG time." But the net effect would be 160-ish seconds of RT (20 for the pour + 3 for the cast, 7 times) and then the customer--assuming that the Wizard succeeded at all of them...--can run off and use the item immediately, while the Enchanter then staggers to the bank. (And waits 3 months while his "internal attunement to the flows of mana" recuperates, or whatever verbiage gets attached to it, before being able to do another Major Project.) >> DOUG

This. I don't think it will be happening, at least not in the short term. I'm not convinced it's an entirely good design, yet. I'd need to run a lot more numbers to see what the impact would be in the long term.

--
Naos, Team M&M

I'm immune to fire! Now with more banhammer! You sense the bond between you and your grey cat grow stronger.

dot

Swami71

05-11-2010, 05:54 PM

I don't like Naos. His view on enchanting enhancives is no fun. Gives us the ability to enchant enhancives but anything that is worth while isn't enchantable. UGH!!!

I do agree with his limit on major enchanting projects though.

SanGreal

05-11-2010, 06:22 PM

I'm fairly certain it will never generate anything better than 5x in terms of enchantment, as generated items derive their bonus from their material, with few exceptions. You won't see a mithril item generated with a plus better than 5, for example. (GM Strathspey can correct me on this if I'm off the mark.)

Way off the mark.

Drew

05-11-2010, 08:27 PM

We have an average of 55 7x projects, 130 6x projects, and 250 5x projects completed successfully per month over the last year.

That's a shit load of enchantments.

Lumi

05-11-2010, 09:14 PM

The treasure system has been updated to add a chance for a bonus low value gem to be included when creating a treasure box. This bonus gem is in addition to whatever treasure the creature would have generated prior to this change. The impetus behind this update is to allow higher level players to more easily retrieve low value gems that may be required for various systems (alchemy, cobbling, etc).

Coase

Awesome change, imo.

Lumi

05-12-2010, 12:01 AM

Hi, all,

We've been working on a design for 340 and want to solicit player feedback on the proposal.

Staff of the Proselyte (340): Clerics are called upon to convert new followers to their flock and to punish the unrepentant. When cast upon the target's runestaff, the caster receives a Spirit CS or bolt AS bonus equal to 5 + the cleric's (INF bonus / 2) for the next few warding or bolt spells. It has base duration of 2 casts + 1 additional cast per (Spiritual Lore, Blessings skill / 50). If the targets spell is cast against an opposing alignment of the cleric (Bane/Smite) then there is an additional +CS/AS modifier equal to the cleric's (WIS bonus / 3). In addition, when the attack is made, instead of adding a d100, it will use 50 + d50 (similar to the Truehand CMAN). To gain the benefit of this effect, the target would CHANT to their runestaff, initiating the buff for the next cast.

To summarize, you'd receive about ~+25 CS/AS with your next attack spell and use a 50 + d50 roll in the attack formula. It is castable on others, but it only works on runestaves and only people with sufficient runestaff training can active it. With reasonable training, you can get about 4 charges per cast.

GameMaster Estild
Cleric/Empath Team

Needs to last longer than 4 casts, imo, but neat idea. Weapon clerics get shafted, but I guess they're not using their spells as much, anyway.

petroglyph

05-12-2010, 08:45 AM

Awesome change, imo.

Thumbs down from me. More crap gems in boxes = fewer boxes fitting in my disk. Blah.

Nuc

05-12-2010, 09:03 AM

Thumbs down from me. More crap gems in boxes = fewer boxes fitting in my disk. Blah.

That's what 416 is for.

Fallen

05-12-2010, 10:37 AM

<< Leave Haste out of this! Haste is NOT too powerful... >> DOUG

Uh...yes, it is.

--
Naos

I'm immune to fire! Now with more banhammer! You sense the bond between you and your grey cat grow stronger.
*
Between this comment and one regarding Glass Amulets, Naos is soon to be Nerfing the crap out of stuff.

Nuc

05-12-2010, 10:41 AM

Between this comment and one regarding Glass Amulets, Naos is soon to be Nerfing the crap out of stuff.

What was the comment on glass amulets?

Fallen

05-12-2010, 10:41 AM

Well, I just found a couple bugs with scarabs that I went ahead and fixed.

Spirit Dispel (119) and Mental Dispel (1218) now work to dispel scarabs just like Elemental Dispel (417) did previously. Note that using a dispel is a guaranteed disarm, but it the worst way to disarm a scarab in terms of silver value.

Disarm (408) was improperly using Minor Spiritual spell ranks instead of Minor Elemental spell ranks to determine the success to disarm the scarab. This has been fixed.

Also, does anyone know what casting Curse (715) at a not-yet disarmed scarab does? It's pretty neat.

GameMaster Oscuro

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team
*
Probably blows them up or something.

Fallen

05-12-2010, 10:47 AM

What was the comment on glass amulets?

Rimalon was bitching about Alchemy made inviso amulets being worse than Glass Amulets from the shop, to which Naos chimed in, "thanks for reminding me." You can take that to mean they will make alchemy items better... Or, that they will nerf the store bought ones.

They will likely do both, or just nerf the glass amulets.

Celephais

05-12-2010, 11:01 AM

Disarm (408) was improperly using Minor Spiritual spell ranks instead of Minor Elemental spell ranks to determine the success to disarm the scarab. This has been fixed.
This is an awesome fix. I just ignored scarab traps and thought they were impossible to disarm.

... Does he me red pulsing the box or disarming ones popped out of boxes? If he means ones popped out of boxes (like dispel), it's a pretty dumb feature IMO. In order to get the scarab out of the box you need a skilled disarmer, so you're better off just having them skritch it anyway.

caelric

05-12-2010, 11:13 AM

Disarm (408) was improperly using Minor Spiritual spell ranks instead of Minor Elemental spell ranks to determine the success to disarm the scarab. This has been fixed.

Good fix, in addition to the 119 and 1218 fix for scarab, but it makes you wonder how many bugs like this are wandering around, and how in the hell have they existed since the change to GS4 without any dev/coding GM's noticing?

Asrial

05-12-2010, 11:40 AM

..but it makes you wonder how many bugs like this are wandering around, and how in the hell have they existed since the change to GS4 without any dev/coding GM's noticing?There's a lot of bugs out there. Some helpful.. some harmful.

As to noticing it...

Learn any programming language and you'll understand how they can go unnoticed for so long.

audioserf

05-12-2010, 12:24 PM

Between this comment and one regarding Glass Amulets, Naos is soon to be Nerfing the crap out of stuff.

I hope he just makes Haste self-cast and leaves it at that. If he truly fucks the spell up I'll be selling off my account (with a useless warmage packing the annual fixskill) if anyone wants to build an enchanting bitch out of him.

Fallen

05-12-2010, 12:27 PM

I imagine it will just go self-cast, perhaps with a boost to the lore based benefits.

Ryvicke

05-12-2010, 12:29 PM

I imagine it will just go self-cast, perhaps with a boost to the lore based benefits.

I'm going to say it goes untouched. Haste going self-cast would mangle some MA squads, which would lose Simu cash.

Making rapid-fire self-cast however makes a ton of sense.

audioserf

05-12-2010, 12:33 PM

Here's hoping. They won't give a good fuck about my $15/mo, but I don't have the patience to grind an alt through the levels again. Ten years ago, sure... but now I just play in my spare time, so if they fuck up 33 (and counting) levels of doing the warmage build.. it just won't be worth it anymore.

Inspire

05-12-2010, 04:26 PM

I'm going to say it goes untouched. Haste going self-cast would mangle some MA squads, which would lose Simu cash.

Making rapid-fire self-cast however makes a ton of sense.

Same boat, different profession.

If they touch Haste or RapidFire, I'll have no use for a wizard, like most people.

thefarmer

05-12-2010, 05:48 PM

Re: Staff of the Proselyte (340) · on 5/12/2010 11:32:37 AM 2953

Reply
>>I hardly think shield using pures are "deviated from the norm" as any high level pure will eventually switch to shields once they have TPs due to disarm in Nelemar and OTF. Anyone who doesn't, is someone who "deviates from the norm" since they are just setting themselves up to die. Pures aren't meant to get hit. Shields protect far better for this condition than do runestaves. As someone with 2x MIU/AS/HP and who is overtrained in other magical skills, my runestaff DS is laughably low when compared to my 4x shield DS.

Runestaff defense is intentionally lower than shield DS - you're getting it for free. It comes as a bonus for just training in magical skills. This is, however, the intended route, as pures are meant to have substantial magical skills. And getting both shields and high magical skill levels is only going to happen in a post-cap scenario. This then turns a non-choice into a choice, which is absolutely intended. You should have to choose whether you prefer stronger defense or stronger magic.

Additionally, shields are hardly immune from being assaulted - Vvrael destroyers already use Sunder Shield, and it is going to be an increasingly popular CM for that style of creatures.

GameMaster Oscuro

I underlined the portion I thought interesting.

Jayvn

05-12-2010, 06:35 PM

Last time I had checked on my now elsewhere capped wizard... I got more defense with a shield and runestaff... as dumb as that was... He was trained for the shield I just wanted to see what kinda DS the staff had..

Latrinsorm

05-12-2010, 07:38 PM

Yeah, there are a lot of flat DS bonuses that are very significant for pures, due to their having relatively low relevant ranks.

Celephais

05-12-2010, 11:05 PM

Yeah, there are a lot of flat DS bonuses that are very significant for pures, due to their having relatively low relevant ranks.

I believe stance heavily leans in favor of shield as well, since defensive/guarded stance DS usually makes little difference (either way it's high enough), the offensive stance becomes more important, and then runestaff DS just melts away.

Inspire

05-13-2010, 08:25 AM

>>You have already taken away one of those bonuses (the negative impact of INF on hiding). Is there really an overabundance of sneaky rogues among the small races such that their advantages need to be reduced and the big races given extra advantages? My impression is that it is the other way around, due to the heavy combat penalties for being small.

I don't know what you're talking about with INF. It doesn't affect hiding chances at all. And the idea that the lower one of your stats is makes you better at something is just bad design - higher stats is meant to be better. In fact, all three short races have bonuses to hiding. Halflings have a slight bonus everywhere, Forest Gnomes have a moderate bonus in forest areas and Burghal Gnomes have a slight bonus in town.

GameMaster Oscuro

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team

https://www.play.net/forums/messages.asp?forum=102&category=28&topic=2&message=4230

>>How often do people roll up a shortie strictly for mechanical benefit? Rarely, and generally only Halflings for pure locksmithing.

Both these races have some combat bonuses that aren't anything to snuff at. There are the hiding bonuses I just mentioned. Halflings have +40 ETD, which is essentially 13.333 levels worth of free TD against elemental spells - considering how often Rogues complain about TD issues, this should be an enormous incentive. I believe halflings have a bonus against disease. Gnomes get a significant bonus to RT reduction for cocking crossbows. I already talked about how they have some of the highest creature maneuver defense in the game.

>>If it's not the encumbrance (which is a huge deal in GS4) it's the extra 8 seconds required to kill something due to an additional ambush.

I agree encumbrance is a significant penalty, but it's what offsets the significant bonuses. However, there are a couple easy ways to offset encumbrance issues as a short Rogue - Surge of Strength and white crystals/a Wizard friend with the Strength spell.

It doesn't take an extra 8 seconds to ambush something. If you're running Shadow Mastery and using a dagger, it's 6 seconds. Plus, there isn't even necessarily a need to aim for the legs, since with unaimed attacks, the short races are far more likely to default to hitting the legs, which if done from hiding, is probably going to leg your opponent anyway. Also, there's the Hamstring CMAN which doesn't require you to be hidden, only takes 3 seconds, and has a bonus for the short races.

I honestly think you're not considering all your possibilities if it's an obvious choice to not play a short race as a Rogue. Of all the professions, I think Rogue is one of the best paired with a halfling or gnome.

GameMaster Oscuro

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team

audioserf

05-13-2010, 08:46 AM

He must just be towing the party line there. Halflings/gnomes are not mechanically advantageous races. They're for RP. It is never better NOT to be able to one-shot when hunting. Period.

StrayRogue

05-13-2010, 01:05 PM

Halflings/gnomes are not mechanically advantageous races.

Neither are dark elves, krolvin, humans, or erithians. What is your point?

Danical

05-13-2010, 07:02 PM

I could see the benefit of being a halfling spiritualist; you'd never have to worry about TD and you'd be pretty fantastic at maneuvering.

Mechanically, a halfling empath is pretty ballin'

Inspire

05-13-2010, 07:17 PM

I could see the benefit of being a halfling spiritualist; you'd never have to worry about TD and you'd be pretty fantastic at maneuvering.

Mechanically, a halfling empath is pretty ballin'

Gob is a beast.

Drew

05-13-2010, 11:42 PM

Neither are dark elves, krolvin, humans, or erithians. What is your point?

Krolvins make some of the best archers in the game.

Baelog

05-14-2010, 02:50 AM

Dark Elves aren't mechanically advantageous?! Then why in the hell are there so many of them!?

StrayRogue

05-14-2010, 08:06 AM

Krolvins make some of the best archers in the game.

Just like halflings make the best mages.

Everyone has disadvantages and advantages.

That was the point.

People whining about smaller races being heavily penalised just don't really know much about game mechanics.

Fallen

05-14-2010, 09:31 AM

>>The more detailed version of what I mean to ask is: is there a heirarchy of racial penalties and bonuses for integral systems throughout the game? Are giantmen, for instance, receiving a penalty to meaneuver roles that has nothing to do with any of their stats or skills?

The racial modifiers to standard creature maneuver defense were posted by former GM Warden a couple years ago. I'm sure that's a saved post on Krakiipedia or something. Every race should be represented - if it's not, then it's baseline.

>>Do Sylvans also have a modifier to their crossbow cock time and if so, is it just average? Or is it more like 9 races are at a baseline 0 bonus to maneuver rolls and 2 races have slight bonuses?

For crossbow cocking, dwarves get a slight bonus and gnomes get the larger one. All other races are baseline.

>>Also: forest gnomes get a bonus to hiding in a forest? Burghals in town? Sylvans get anything? Humans? any other racial hiding bonus?

Here's a complete breakdown of racial modifiers to hiding, I've adjusted the description of them from my last post so they're more easily comparable:

Human moderate bonus in town
Giantman moderate penalty everywhere
Half-elf slight bonus everywhere
Sylvankind large bonus in forests
Dwarf large bonus in mountain caves, moderate bonus outdoors in the mountains
Halfling moderate bonus everywhere
Forest Gnome large bonus in forests
Burghal Gnome moderate bonus in town

Every other race is baseline. For clarity, slight < moderate < large.

>>I'll stop after this.

Whew. ;)
GameMaster Oscuro

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team

Good info here.

Ryvicke

05-14-2010, 10:10 AM

Good info here.

Yeeahhhhh! I checked after my post for a good hour but then forgot all about it yesterday. Can't believe he answered all that. I probably could've thought of better questions.

I still want that racial maneuver modifier info. Anyone have it?

crb

05-14-2010, 10:10 AM

Isn't the main disadvantage of a short race being the inability to ambush head on certain critters, as well as offensive cman issues with some manuevers.

But then the advantages, of course, are manuever defense, awesome TD for dwarves & hobbits, spirit return, general sexiness (for dwarves anyways).

Fallen

05-14-2010, 10:37 AM

Yeeahhhhh! I checked after my post for a good hour but then forgot all about it yesterday. Can't believe he answered all that. I probably could've thought of better questions.

I still want that racial maneuver modifier info. Anyone have it?

Might want to try Krakiipedia. I can't track it down on the PC.

Ryvicke

05-14-2010, 10:47 AM

Might want to try Krakiipedia. I can't track it down on the PC.

Found it:

http://www.krakiipedia.org/wiki/Creature_maneuver

I'm not leet enough to make tables:

EDIT: that looked horrible... let's do it like this:

Best: Burghal gnome
Excellent: Halfling, Forest gnome, Elf
Good: Half-elf, Dark elf, Sylvankind, Erithian, Aelotoi

All others baseline.

Fallen

05-14-2010, 10:51 AM

Ah. I remember Giants having a penalty to dodging maneuvers due to their size. Also, the other gnome type deserves excellent maneuver protection. It isn't like they can stand more than 1 or 2 shots before their dead anyway.

Inspire

05-15-2010, 02:01 AM

>>Yes, but hard flat is plenty of other places too. If you give a human a bonus for being in town (presumably because it is crowded and humans are plentiful), it doesn't make sense for him to get a bonus just because the room was set up as hard flat.

It's not a hard/flat terrain bonus. It's an in town bonus, just like I said.

GameMaster Oscuro

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team
reply

Fallen

05-16-2010, 09:41 PM

Can't say as I disagree with this one.

SIWAS
Do we have the option to toggle the messaging yet?

No, we decided against such an option. As stated before, clerics are not the profession to hide their faith. It's their job to spread it. However, if you do desire to hide it, it's as simple as not casting a spell with deity specific messaging. Lastly, we did not want to create an opportunity for clerics to convert to one deity for mechanical reasons, but then allow them to choose generic messaging because they really worship another.

GameMaster Estild
Cleric/Empath Team
*

HouseofElves

05-16-2010, 11:34 PM

Can't say as I disagree with this one.

Are you a cleric? I don't like it one bit. That's forcing all cleric's to be bringers of faith, forgetting there are other members of the clergy that aren't evangelistic fanatics. Or that some Arkati would be better served with discretion.

At least my character has one of the more tasteful messages.

Danical

05-16-2010, 11:41 PM

Yeah, not all clerics are evangelical; especially the ones that represent something and deliver another . . . always my favorite and always the best for RP, I think.

Lulfas

05-17-2010, 01:17 AM

Or that some Arkati would be better served with discretion.

I don't know much of the Arkati lore, but that would seem to be your best point of attack. Find an Arkati or two which would prefer their priests not be known to everyone (isn't there an assassin god or something?) and complain about it directly.

Rimalon

05-17-2010, 02:08 AM

Anyone know if I get this fruity messaging if I raise from a scroll or item?

Latrinsorm

05-17-2010, 02:14 AM

That's forcing all cleric's to be bringers of faith, forgetting there are other members of the clergy that aren't evangelistic fanatics.GM design choices trump player roleplay choices. It's certainly annoying, but GS just isn't a sandbox/free-for-all game.

HouseofElves

05-17-2010, 03:00 AM

Anyone know if I get this fruity messaging if I raise from a scroll or item?

I'm fairly sure it's connected to the spell 318/1640, not being a cleric/paladin.

Nilandia

05-17-2010, 07:35 AM

Anyone know if I get this fruity messaging if I raise from a scroll or item?
Yes, you'll get the messaging. I got it when I raised someone to test it.

Made me quite happy, actually.

Gretchen

Gnomad

05-17-2010, 05:05 PM

I don't know much of the Arkati lore, but that would seem to be your best point of attack. Find an Arkati or two which would prefer their priests not be known to everyone (isn't there an assassin god or something?) and complain about it directly.Yup, my buddy is a priest of Onar.

I don't know if he's going to raise anyone anymore.

Fallen

05-17-2010, 05:47 PM

Cast 220? Or yes, don't resurrect if you're that protective of your true patron. I think the best answer to this problem so far is Orisons. A guild learned skill that would obscure the ritual would be fine by me.

Gnomad

05-17-2010, 05:59 PM

Cast 220?Also deity-related, although somewhat subtle. He could paint a runestone to get a natural 220 so that he can raise in peace, but that's a silly amount of work to hide the fact that you worship an assassin. And the deader would still know his god.

(Note I haven't seen Onar's 312 messaging yet, it might be a non-issue. He doesn't want to try in public and none of my chars have died while he was on since the change.)

Lumi

05-17-2010, 07:02 PM

And the deader would still know his god.

I'm kinda surprised about this. One of the benefits of training Religion lore was knowing the alignment of the cleric who raised you.

Inspire

05-20-2010, 07:52 PM

Dateline 5/19/2010: READY, SET, ACTION!

Has this ever happened to you?

Billy: "Oh, Sandra, I'm moving closer to you in a dramatic manner as I lean in for a kiss..."
Director: "Cuuuuuuuuuuuuut!"
Sandra: SIGHS
Director: "Hey, Billy, what's wrong, man?"
Director: "Why do you keep saying Sandra's name while you're interacting with her?"
Director: "You've done it every time. I mean, seriously?"
Billy: "I just want to be sure that everyone watching knows who my actions are involving!"
Director: "Uh, we can see that, buddy"
Director: "Listen...just take it from the top, and try to ACT a little this time..."

Of course it has. It happens to every role-player. You're loitering around your town's <generic gathering area> and decide to RP-it-up a little. Being the ace player you are, you break out some liberal use of the ACTION verb. Then, it happens; you have a crowd gathering around your star performance, and you need to interact with someone or something other than yourself.

Luckily for you, the ACTION verb has been updated to perform actions in the context of a target that you specify! Fancy!

Here, we have the old and tired ACTION verb.

>act quickly removes his hat and bows deeply to Lady Fancyknickers.
(Naos quickly removes his hat and bows deeply to Lady Fancyknickers.)

Well played, Naos! You're sure to earn the favor of Ms. Fancyknickers!

>act leans on the dirty, grimy, overflow-with-garbage wooden barrel with a deep sigh.
(Naos leans on the dirty, grimy, overflow-with-garbage wooden barrel with a deep sigh.)

Oh, my! Dramatic!

>act kicks you in the face!
(Naos kicks y--

Wait, what? Oh, you cheeky little....

These actions may be all well and good, but think for a moment what these look like from the perspective of others? Lady Fancyknickers will see exactly what everyone else sees, and she might even be wondering why you misspelled her name. The barrel...well, it's a barrel, and it really could care less. Let's not talk about that last one, and if I catch you tricksy little bleeders trying that one on for size, so help me....

Er, where were we? Ah, right! Imagine, now, that you could perform that action in the context of a specific target and use some cleverness to get your target's name in there automagically?

>act :fancyknickers quickly removes his hat and bows deeply to @!
(Naos quickly removes his hat and bows deeply to Fancyknickers!)

What's that you say? It looks the same as before? Let us take a look at this from the perspective of the esteemed Lady Fancyknickers!

(Naos quickly removes his hat and bows deeply to you!)

Ooh la la! How about a little more?

>act :snerttwit walks up to @, pulls # trousers down, and gives % a right good kick in the bum!
(Naos walks up to Snerttwit, pulls his trousers down, and gives him a right good kick in the bum!)

He had it coming; the best part is what Snerttwit saw on his end.

(Naos walks up to you, pulls your trousers down, and gives you a right good kick in the bum!)

Fancy! Look how those eldritch sigils are changed to reflect the target in various ways! Witchcraft!

For details on the updated syntax for the ACTION verb, type HELP ACTION.

Finally, always remember to ACT responsibly.

END NEWS ITEM

--
Naos

I'm immune to fire! Now with more banhammer! You sense the bond between you and your grey cat grow stronger.

>act @you on @

https://www.play.net/forums/messages.asp?forum=102&category=9&topic=10&message=4742

Gnomad

05-22-2010, 10:45 AM

I'll bet dollars to donuts that this is just a copy-paste of whatever GM tool exists for them to do acts without the ().

Decent update, but I haven't seen anyone use ACT since I was on Prodigy.

thefarmer

05-22-2010, 02:42 PM

Re: Divine Engagement · on 5/20/2010 11:28:40 PM 5041

Dgry
Unlike bards and rangers, we have no spells that help with avoiding manuevers.

Dauntless (1606) and Patron's Blessing (1611).

GameMaster Estild
Cleric/Empath Team

Re: Divine Engagement · on 5/21/2010 8:20:50 AM 5046

Dgry
Also, maybe a comparison for the weighting - something like you get more help than mass blur but less than mobiles. Commonly available/used spells can be used to help us players gauge how much something does or doesn't help. You don't have to give exact numbers or formulas.

Dauntless provides as much benefit to paladins as Mobility does to rangers. Patron's Blessing contributes through skill ranks since it increases your Combat Maneuvers skill.

GameMaster Estild
Cleric/Empath Team

x

Inspire

05-22-2010, 05:30 PM

I was surprised by that one. I figured rangers 618 was much better.

(Shows us what we really know about our spells)

Danical

05-22-2010, 05:33 PM

I was surprised by that one. I figured rangers 618 was much better.

(Shows us what we really know about our spells)

I think in practice 618 is better since spell training for Rangers is cheaper and Rangers generally get far more ranger circle spells than paladins get paladin circle spells.

Drew

05-22-2010, 05:35 PM

I think in practice 618 is better since spell training for Rangers is cheaper and Rangers generally get far more ranger circle spells than paladins get paladin circle spells.

This would make sense if dodge affected SMR.

Danical

05-22-2010, 05:39 PM

This would make sense if dodge affected SMR.

I would suggest reading this very thread more thoroughly.

>Does the bonus 618 provides to avoiding standard critter maneuvers increase with dedicated training in the ranger circle? If so, is the bonus capped at level? -Droit

Yes, the Mobility bonus is dependent upon Ranger spell ranks. The bonus is not capped.

-M(estys)

http://forum.gsplayers.com/showpost.php?p=1032236&postcount=223

Fallen

05-27-2010, 09:20 AM

>(Hint. Person in charge of paladin spell review, please chime in. Hint.) ~ The girl behind Debia

This is one of the issues we will be reviewing, yep.

I have a couple of other discussions going on before we'll get into the nitty gritty of the Paladin spell review, but once we've got some notions established, they'll be posted for player perusal.

-M.
http://www.play.net/forums/messages.asp?forum=102&category=32&topic=16&message=5061

thefarmer

06-01-2010, 05:23 PM

Re: What's wrong with this picture? · on 6/1/2010 3:03:42 PM 3524

Reply
>A lesser minotaur belts out a guttural battle cry as he raises his silvery white greataxe high above his head!

That's creature-specific messaging for Mighty Blow, which has a stance pushdown component.

Coase

.

Fallen

06-01-2010, 05:26 PM

If you're a real good Wizard, then your talismans will more often summon the exact familiar you used to create the talisman originally.

--
Naos, it's all about the Wizard Base spell ranks

I'm immune to fire! Now with more banhammer! You sense the bond between you and your grey cat grow stronger.

----

I'll go ahead and tell you that having 100 ranks in Wizard Base won't get you the same familiar 100% of the time.

That will be a feature of familiar bonding.

--
Naos

I'm immune to fire! Now with more banhammer! You sense the bond between you and your grey cat grow stronger.

\

Sylvan Dreams

06-05-2010, 08:03 PM

Oscuro on the thrown review. The short version of the conversation is that people were complaining that GM's have been playing in Shattered instead of working on past-due goals.

>>It may not 'count' but it's definitely time not being spent getting the thrown review finished.

>>Need I remind you that it was due out at the end of the first quarter LAST YEAR.

>>Not this year. Being worked on only goes so far when systems are so far past due as to be not funny.

Need I remind you that these "due" dates that you're claiming are only goals and not promises? If this wasn't a volunteer staff, your points might be valid any development in this game beyond the status quo should be considered a special addition and not a baseline expectation.

The thrown review is being worked on. It will be released when it's released. Complaining that other things are happening before this project isn't going to get you anywhere.

GameMaster Oscuro

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team

Gnomad

06-06-2010, 03:20 PM

A town I used to teach at didn't allow volunteers to coach sports. In the past, every time they took volunteer coaches, they'd flake out and let the kids down.

I'm not sure why I thought of this just now.

Asha

06-06-2010, 03:46 PM

Oscuro on the thrown review. The short version of the conversation is that people were complaining that GM's have been playing in Shattered instead of working on past-due goals.

Wow that was hands down the most 'fuck you, customers' post I've heard a GM come out with.

Gnomad

06-06-2010, 05:50 PM

Wow that was hands down the most 'fuck you, customers' post I've heard a GM come out with.

Yeah, that's one of those times you write up the response but don't post it.

Fallen

06-11-2010, 11:09 AM

Does anyone know if 340 will be released with the new 335 Divine Wrath...and the 319 Buffer spells as one or a series of one?Or is it more like we will get em out as we can?Either way is fine with me...but I was curious.

The spells will be released individually as they are ready, with 340 coming first. Assuming you mean Crusade as the "319 buffer spell", that idea was scrapped for clerics based upon player feedback.

GameMaster Estild
Cleric/Empath Team
.

Fallen

06-15-2010, 09:38 PM

The commonly found Arcane Circle trinkets (see the spell descriptions for a complete list) are now stealable. However, objects weighing two pounds or heavier cannot be stolen, which includes small statues and heavy quartz orbs.

GameMaster Oscuro

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team

This includes 1750 items, which are quite rare.

Fallen

06-18-2010, 12:04 AM

It's that time again and we're actively looking at applications for the Host Team. GameHosts are required to have a good knowledge of the game and should be able to answer questions about basic technical issues and general gameplay. They must also possess excellent customer service skills, be able to commit to a set shift schedule of six hours per week, and have demonstrated a history of following the policies of GemStone IV.

If you are interested in becoming a GameHost and think you have what it takes to be an outstanding member of the team then read the requirements and submit your application at https://www.play.net/gs4/apply/hostapp.asp today! Remember that the application is your first opportunity to make a good impression!

If you missed the recent Host Forum and would like to get more information before applying, a player has kindly made the log available on krakiipedia.

GM Zyllah
GSIV Host Coordinator

This message was originally posted in Discussions with Simutronics, Help Wanted: GemStone Staff Teams. To discuss the above follow the link below.

http://www.play.net/forums/messages.asp?forum=102&category=8&topic=8&message=152
*
.

Fallen

06-18-2010, 12:08 AM

two from the Big O.

If you guys are curious what I have in store for the next round of coolness, I suggest you show up at the con. It's in less than a month! Also, it'd be cool to hang/drink with some of y'all. I hear Rogues are witty. ;)

GameMaster Oscuro

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team
*

>>will there be a conversion allowed? or will all monks have to start from scratch?

People trained > 1x in Brawling at some date (to be decided in the future) will be allowed to convert to a Monk. So the classes with the potential for that (but are not guaranteed unless they have the training) are the extant squares (Warrior, Rogue) and semis (Paladin, Ranger, Bard). This will almost certainly work similarly to how Paladin conversions occurred; there was a period of a few months for people to play new Paladins before conversion was available.

GameMaster Oscuro

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team
*

Ryvicke

06-21-2010, 11:00 AM

Oscuro clarifying that profession is not a consideration in difficulty of bandits.

>>In response to a comment about about bandit tasks and them having a bais against squares or pures....

>>Bandits, nor any creatures for that matter, explicitly change their difficulty based on the profession of their target.

>>GameMaster Oscuro

>>Rogue Team
>>Cleric/Empath Team

>>I'm confused then due to the "nor". I read the "explicitly change their difficulty based on the profession of their target." and understood that profession was a consideration for bandits, but maybe I was completely mistaken.

>>Oh, Oscuurrrooooooo, where arrrrreeee yoouuuu?

Maybe I just don't know how to use the word "nor," but I meant that profession is NOT an explicit factor in difficulty.

I always understand the sentence "Bill nor Sally is happy" to be equivalent to "both Bill and Sally are not happy."

GameMaster Oscuro

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team

thefarmer

06-22-2010, 04:12 PM

Re: Offensive CMAN Choice · on 6/22/2010 6:35:41 AM 5387

>>As a full plate wearer, who trains in Two handed weapons is the "evade mastery" worth training in. I'm not positive on the math, but with the formula and the -5 for the plate, the max percentage I'd get with 3 ranks would be a whopping 7 percent? Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated, thanks!

With Evade Mastery, you get the following percent evasion per rank: Robes 9%, Leather 7%, Scale 5%, Chain 3% and Plate 1%. Parry and Block Mastery give a flat 5% per rank (though Parry Mastery requires you carry a weapon you can parry with and Block Mastery requires you use a shield).

GameMaster Oscuro

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team

Nice, easy to read breakdown.

thefarmer

06-22-2010, 04:13 PM

Also, if possible could the folks pasting posts from the boards include the post number and date portion (Re: Offensive CMAN Choice · on 6/22/2010 6:35:41 AM 5387).

I know I'd appreciate it and other might as well.

Taluric

06-22-2010, 08:24 PM

All Forums
GemStone IV
Magic Spells/Systems
Mentalist Circle

GS4-ESTILD Re: Mental Casting Stats · on 6/22/2010 6:54:20 PM 546

We'll be using a new system for the mental CS stat. Instead of a single stat for all mental spells, the responsible stats will be dependent upon the type of mental magic used.

The Minor Mental circle is considered a generic/dabbler's list, so it will only use the LOG bonus. Logic is considered the key stat for mental acuity. For each race, we'll see the following breakdown:

Outstanding (+10) - Burghal Gnomes
Good (+5) - Humans, Dwarves, Halflings, Forest Gnomes, Erithians, Aelotoi
Average - Half Elves, Sylvans, Dark Elves, Elves
Poor (-5) - Giantmen
Terrible (-10) - Half Krolvin

The Major Mental circle, which will focus on telepathy and divination, will use an average of INF and LOG bonuses. Influence is considered a key stat for mental magic that affects the minds of others. For each race, we'll see the following breakdown:

Good (+5) - Erithians, Elves
Above Average (+2.5) - Humans, Giantmen, Half-Elves, Halflings
Average - Sylvans, Dark Elves, Burghal Gnomes, Aelotoi
Below Average (-2.5) - Forest Gnomes
Poor (-5) - Dwarves
Worst (-7.5) Half Krolvin

The Savant circle, which will focus on manipulation, transformation, and transference, will use the average of DIS and LOG bonuses. Discipline is considered a key stat for mental magic where the caster is using force of will to manipulate matter or energy. For each race, we'll see the following breakdown:

Excellent (+7.5) - Dwarves
Good (+5) - Erithians, Forest Gnomes, Aelotoi
Above Average (+2.5)- Humans, Burghal Gnomes
Average - Halflings
Below Average (-2.5) - Giantmen, Half-Elves, Sylvans
Poor (-5) - Dark Elves, Half-Krolvin
Worst (-7.5) - Elves

"With the above approach, Erithians are either best or second best at all types of CS-based Mental magic, and only Erithians and Humans have bonuses to all three lists. Elves are strong telepaths but weak manipulators. Dwarves, on the other hand, are weak telepaths but strong manipulators. Burghal gnomes are excellent dabblers but not too exceptional when they get into the specialized lists. We think that fits well with the concepts for all of those races. All races except Half Krolvin, Sylvans, and Dark Elves would have some facet of Mental CS-based magic at which they are above average. And for the Sylvans and Dark Elves, they would still be the best of the Elven-types when it comes to Mental bolt spells." - Warden (not going to bother rephrasing since he explained it so well).

GameMaster Estild
Cleric/Empath Team

Fallen

06-22-2010, 08:29 PM

Weird. Go humans, I guess.

Drew

06-22-2010, 10:31 PM

Weird. Go humans, I guess.

What do you find weird about it?

Fallen

06-22-2010, 10:36 PM

>>Definitely going to hinder anyone who had plans of making a half-krolvin mental anything

HKs actually make pretty good Monks. Monks aren't really expected to use the warding spells much in the 1200s, so the logic penalty doesn't mean a lot. The Strength, Agility and Constitution bonuses and the lack of Dexterity or Discipline penalty work out nicely, though. Not many races boast that good of a spread of the physical stats (only dwarves have a higher sum of those five stats).

GameMaster Oscuro, who's considering making a half-krolvin monk

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team

http://www.play.net/forums/messages.asp?forum=102&category=18&topic=7&message=551

Drew

06-22-2010, 10:47 PM

Half krolvins are the best archer race bar none, and for all the combat classes it's hard to argue against HKs.

TheLastShamurai

06-27-2010, 01:53 PM

>>Warrior bonding most surely gives a bonus to aiming. I do not think, and am sure I have not heard any official statements, that paladin bonding does the same.

Neither Weapon Bonding nor Sanctify (1625) affect aimed strikes (via the AMBUSH command) in any way.

GameMaster Oscuro

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team

.

Deathravin

06-27-2010, 02:08 PM

But I thought it 'most surely' did... LOL. I love the things people have no proof of yet take as absolute fact.

Khariz

06-27-2010, 02:16 PM

But I thought it 'most surely' did... LOL. I love the things people have no proof of yet take as absolute fact.

Actually...there's something about being Warrior Bonded to something that does help ambushing percentage. The poster may not have been differentiating the issues properly. The GM is likely only talking about an effect on the AMBUSH SKILL itself, which makes sense.

Being full warrior bonded to a weapon does, however, increase the percentage amount of time that you successfully ambush, via assisted EBP numbers.

Let me see if I can explain this:

1. Using a maul and open ambushing at legs with 25 ambush skill, capped CM, lets say I get a 66% success rate of hitting the leg I mean to per ambush.

2. I may be able to demonstrate that ambushing at that same leg, same 25 skill, same capped CM, but add in level 5 warrior bond, and my success rate jumps to say 70%.

I have personally crunched numbers like this and came up with respectively similar results. What I did not do, however, which I should have, was removed the data that consisted of EBP blocks to the Ambush. I counted those as "failures" instead of "useless to the data". Being fully bonded, you will have less EBP failures, and thus more "successes", which will artificially make the ambushing % bump up from warrior bond.

Of course, I'm assuming the person who posted that even bothered to actually cruch any numbers at all. Had they though, they could have still come up with a result contrary to what the GM said, had they crunched their numbers like I did.

Stanley Burrell

06-27-2010, 02:18 PM

If you're a half-Krol, whatever'd to the max in survival, have 602 running and have Reggy break down some iceblossoms to resist your brig...

Can you just sit on the Glatoph's Glacier?

thefarmer

06-27-2010, 02:37 PM

Being full warrior bonded to a weapon does, however, increase the percentage amount of time that you successfully ambush, via assisted EBP numbers.

Are you sure that's not just the double CML bonus from wspec and bonding?

Of course, I'm assuming the person who posted that even bothered to actually cruch any numbers at all. Had they though, they could have still come up with a result contrary to what the GM said, had they crunched their numbers like I did.

It was Menos.

Khariz

06-27-2010, 02:48 PM

Are you sure that's not just the double CML bonus from wspec and bonding?

It was Menos.

Right. What I am saying is that although bond itself isn't factored into the ambush verb's criteria, it is factored into the end result of how often you get a successful hit against a critter, regardless of if you hit the spot you meant to (which will naturally result in hitting that spot some of the time and thus increase the perception that bond helps ambush, because in a roundabout way it does).

Sorry, typing on phone.

Latrinsorm

06-27-2010, 05:33 PM

But I thought it 'most surely' did... LOL. I love the things people have no proof of yet take as absolute fact.It is worth pointing out that "a GM said so" is an equally suspect method of establishing absolute fact. Here are empirical measurements:

Shock: bonding effects
Kiramon worker

claidhmore left leg 25 out of fifty
0x battleaxe left leg 29 out of fifty
bastard sword left leg 35 out of fifty
dwarven battleaxe 47 out of fifty

claidhmore right eye 7 out of 50
0x battleaxe right eye 8 out of 50
bastard sword left eye 11 out of 50
dwarven battleaxe left eye 27 out of 50

stone giants

claidhmore left leg 10 out of 50
0x battleaxe left leg 12 out of 50
bastard sword left leg 20 out of 50
dwarven battleaxe left leg 35 out of 50

claidhmore righ eye 0 out of 50
0x battleaxe right eye 0 out of 50
bastard sword right eye 3 out of 50
dwarven battleaxe right eye 12 out of 50

Please note how the store-bought (unbonded) battleaxe is inferior to the dwarven (bonded) battleaxe to a statistically significant degree. One caveat is that these numbers are from late 2006, predating the CML review of 2007. Although that review claimed no changes for Weapon Bonding, I want to refer back to my first point - GMs are sometimes incorrect.

Khariz

06-27-2010, 06:02 PM

It is worth pointing out that "a GM said so" is an equally suspect method of establishing absolute fact. Here are empirical measurements:

Shock: bonding effects
Kiramon worker

claidhmore left leg 25 out of fifty
0x battleaxe left leg 29 out of fifty
bastard sword left leg 35 out of fifty
dwarven battleaxe 47 out of fifty

claidhmore right eye 7 out of 50
0x battleaxe right eye 8 out of 50
bastard sword left eye 11 out of 50
dwarven battleaxe left eye 27 out of 50

stone giants

claidhmore left leg 10 out of 50
0x battleaxe left leg 12 out of 50
bastard sword left leg 20 out of 50
dwarven battleaxe left leg 35 out of 50

claidhmore righ eye 0 out of 50
0x battleaxe right eye 0 out of 50
bastard sword right eye 3 out of 50
dwarven battleaxe right eye 12 out of 50

Please note how the store-bought (unbonded) battleaxe is inferior to the dwarven (bonded) battleaxe to a statistically significant degree. One caveat is that these numbers are from late 2006, predating the CML review of 2007. Although that review claimed no changes for Weapon Bonding, I want to refer back to my first point - GMs are sometimes incorrect.

See, but I wonder if your numbers have the same problem as mine. You know how sometimes when you ambush, you get a complete failure? i.e. it doesn't show the combat formula at all? Did you exclude those in your test or count them as a X out of 50 failure? (or did this not happen during the timeframe you speak of? I honestly don't remember.)

Because my supposition was that the CML bonus that bonding offers may actually go toward that complete failure happening less often, thus giving you more combat rolls, thus a statistically higher chance of having the opportunity to hit the correct spot.

If your numbers exclude those combat roll failures, than your numbers are interesting and possibly a direct contravention of the GM's statement. If you numbers do not, you are back to what I was saying. That it is possible for both the GM and the player to be correct.

Latrinsorm

06-27-2010, 06:55 PM

To clarify, those numbers are not from my personal testing but from a poster on the officials named (approximately) ShockS51. From what I recall, the numbers were of 50 resolved attack rolls, which would put aside your legitimate concerns about EBP and failures to find an opening.

Stanley Burrell

06-27-2010, 06:59 PM

If you're a half-Krol, whatever'd to the max in survival, have 602 running and have Reggy break down some iceblossoms to resist your brig...

Can you just sit on the Glatoph's Glacier?

I'm honestly curious about this.

Can you jump into liquid nitrogen if you're an antifreeze monkey?

Drew

06-27-2010, 07:02 PM

I'm honestly curious about this.

Can you jump into liquid nitrogen if you're an antifreeze monkey?

You would still get hit eventually I believe, just would take a while and be low damage.

BriarFox

06-27-2010, 07:23 PM

You would still get hit eventually I believe, just would take a while and be low damage.

Add in some blessings ranks and the likelihood of the wind hitting you is very slim.

Fallen

07-03-2010, 12:52 AM

I'd just like to clarify something as well as announce some new updates to the Event Guidelines.

The new official place for all MHO information will be the new Ultimate MHO Guide ( www.gemstonemho.pbworks.com )
The Play.net info on the MHO system is largely outdated and has little detail. An update was submitted to change it under Izzea's watch and I intend to follow through with that, but until then, the guide is law.

That being said, there had been a change to how long groups have to wait for structures, which was established a long time ago but the site did not reflect it properly. Groups who gain Tier 3 status must maintain their Tier 3 status consecutively for 12 months after that in order to qualify. Therefor making the real total 24 months. If a group slips in their status, the clock starts over. Structures are designed to provide an attainable goal for groups, but one that promotes ongoing activity and rewards it in the end.

The second bit of information I will list below. 2 new additions have been added to the Event Guidelines and will go in effect as of this month, 7/1/10. #2 and #9 are new and the change will also be updated in-game and on the MHO Guide as well.

In order to earn credit for an event, it must fit the following guidelines:

1. The event must have been advertised in advance on the calendar of events or in-game NEWS.
2. General notices for spur of the moment events are allowed, but a group may only use this option twice a year to receive credit. All other events must be specific in their NEWS announcement.
3. The event must last at least 30 minutes.
4. The event must be IC/IG.
5. The event must have at least 5 participants. They may be members or non-members. Coordinators of the event may count toward the 5 participants if they are present and actively participating.
6. The event must be open to the public. It CAN be restricted to a certain subset of the public (i.e., only elves or only Gosaena worshippers), but it cannot be a "members only" event.
7. Events that are duplicated in a given calendar month count as a single event.
8. Group meetings will not be counted as events, even if they are open to public viewing.
9. Events may be co-hosted by 2 or more groups, but must have at least 10 participants to receive credit.
10. Post event reports must be submitted to the MHO Guru, GM Kenstrom. (See HALL NOTES 14 for a Post-Event Report.)

-GM Kenstrom-
The First Male MHO Guru Ever
Wehnimer's Landing Assistant Guru
http://www.play.net/forums/messages.asp?forum=102&category=21&topic=1&message=104