Forums » The Enchanter

Brainstorming the Enchanter

    • 353 posts
    February 6, 2015 4:04 PM PST
    Jitai said:

    I don't think the Enchanter should be synonymous in any way with a Wizard.  Looking at it as "The Enchanter is another kind of wizard with different spells" kind of diminishes the class.  All Enchanter abilities should be based on mind control (their mind and others' minds), nothing elemental.  I don't see this as being potentially restrictive, just distinctive.  The psionic category should be the litmus test for Enchanter spells.

    the enchanter does control minds but he does it thru mastery of arcane arts, its not unreasonable to think he may have picked up a nuke or 2. if you take away the Arcane art and just have direct mind crontol then that would be a psionicist. instead of having something different you have the same thing VG did but giving it the Name EQ used.

     

    Besides all that was is a template to show how i would lay out the class, i dont assume that the team will use elemental DD or DOT i used it as a point of comparison to make the point that in the class' Main field it should have everything available to it but the secondary and tertiary fields can be restricted to keep the class from being a Jack of all trades.

     


    This post was edited by Gawd at February 7, 2015 6:54 AM PST
    • 70 posts
    February 6, 2015 6:52 PM PST

    Hmm.. Psionics is the pseudo-scientific study of mind and physics melding to allow a gifted individual to effect the physical world synoptically. I did a little more research on it and learned something new.. 

     

    'Pyrokinesis' - The ability to ignite objects with your mind, supposedly through hyper-oxygenation.  This reminds me of a paper I did on spontaneous human combustion.  After being around cryogenic liquid oxygen a lot I came to understand it's properties.  My supposition was that SHC was a result of saturation of fat cells with so much O2 that the flash point of the fatty/O2 combo was brought down to body temperature (flash point of oil is brought down to way below ambient temperature when mixed with liquid O2.. or a saturated gaseous O2 environment.).  

     

    Kind of cool.. but after further study I find that Pyrokinesis was a term first coined by Steven King in the book Firestarter LOL.


    This post was edited by Jitai at February 7, 2015 6:54 AM PST
    • 70 posts
    February 6, 2015 7:22 PM PST

    Yeah Gawd I wasn't refuting what you said at all, just riffin on the 'chanter. Text is such a poor medium for human expression, I made that mistake earlier in this same thread.  Enchanter and Psionicist are pretty synonymous terms really.  An Enchanter's abilities are based on psionics.  As I postulated in my last post (as you were posting yours) I think it would be possible to categorize a lot of cool abilities into psionics.  I was really just stating that if an Enchanter spell/ability is being considered, it should pass the 'drop check' of whether it could possibly fit within the category of mind control (psionics).  Yeah, I agree that psionics is an Arcane(mysterious) ability, just as Elemental Manipulation is Arcane, but they are very distinct branches.  It may be nitpicky to suggest making sure there are no grey areas in the Enchanter abilities that could make them seem to intersect with elemental abilities or other branches of the arcane, but what has always been the root of my fascination with the Enchanter is that it's so unique and.. secret squirrel :)

    • 353 posts
    February 6, 2015 10:55 PM PST

    My whole thought behind the Arcane Arts is one that comes from Fantasy Novels, in nearly all Fantasy Novels Magi do specialize into different branches of the Arcane, but they all start out casting Fireball. Imho the enchanter is an enchanter because when he got past the apprentice stage of casting Fireball he liked the power of controlling othersto do his bidding.

     

    Besides wouldnt it stink if EVERYTHING an enchanter had fell into the Psionic catagory and you got a raid mob with High resistance to Psionics? i do think that the Enchanter needs some form of Direct Magical attack that hits a different resist check than Psi. every other Magical class has more than just one resist check. Wizzy has multiple elemental DD spells, Summoner has the pet doing normal DMG and some nukes as well most likely, shaman should have disease and poison. i dont want to get left out of a raid just because i cant do anything but buff the party and wish them well.

     

    and BTW i dont take anything personal here, i am just enjoying intelligent Discourse on one of my favorite subjects (MMORPGs)


    This post was edited by Gawd at February 7, 2015 6:54 AM PST
    • 70 posts
    February 7, 2015 12:56 AM PST

    I imagine the arcane skills being very intricate and hard won and therefore multi-branch talents would be very rare.  To equate it to real world concepts; if Arcane were equivalent to Science, someone having both elemental and psionic abilities would be the equivalent of a botanist expanding string theory.  I think the gap of comparing evolving arcane ability in fiction to the enchanter is that psionics is rare in fantasy fiction.

     

    I hold to the opinion that Enchanter magic skills should be psionic in nature for the value of uniqueness and purity of the class.

    • 353 posts
    February 7, 2015 4:13 AM PST
    Jitai said:

    I imagine the arcane skills being very intricate and hard won and therefore multi-branch talents would be very rare.  To equate it to real world concepts; if Arcane were equivalent to Science, someone having both elemental and psionic abilities would be the equivalent of a botanist expanding string theory.  I think the gap of comparing evolving arcane ability in fiction to the enchanter is that psionics is rare in fantasy fiction.

     

    I hold to the opinion that Enchanter magic skills should be psionic in nature for the value of uniqueness and purity of the class.

    I am starting to feel that Psionics is a wrong path to creating an Enchanter. The Psionicist of VG Dominates the mind with direct mental energy, the Enchanter of EQ (which is what i think the team is aiming at) the Enchanter uses Illusion and Light to confuse, mesmerize the Target. enchanters use Finesse more like a hypnotist. making the enemy see his friends as foes, rather than domineering his mind and utilizing force to operate his body against his will. using a pretty light pattern in the air to unfocus the mind leaving them open to suggestion.

    • 466 posts
    February 7, 2015 6:50 AM PST

     

    The DDs or DOTs for an EQ enchanter were only useful in the lower levels  when one had sometimes to solo even if one didn't want to.

    Beyond these low/mid levels I have never considered an Enchanter as a damage dealing class and I definitely do not wish it to become a damage dealing class. An Enchanter casting DDs in a group is wilfully putting his group in danger because he will run OOM when a bad pull comes.

    And a bad pull will come ;)  Once an EQ Enchanter got a reputation as being of the DD type, he would be facing a very difficult life.

     

    No DDs and no DOTs for enchanters beyond mid level is perfectly OK with me. No elemental spells either.

    Enchanters are masters of the finer spell crafting aiming always to directly or indirectly manipulate, control and coerce minds. They also learn how to provide suitable inanimate matter with magical properties (this is equivalent to "charming" inanimate matter).

     

    Tha's why the decisions about Enchanter spells are very easy to me - can it be conncted with mind control studies and abilities ?

    If yes, then it can be an enchanter's spell (but must not be !)

    If no, then it cannot be an enchanter's spell.

     

    Then, as usual, there will be the one or 2 odd exceptions that don't really fit in enchanter's philosophy but that were designed for class balancing anyway.

    As long as these are only 1 or 2 exceptions, I can live with it.

    • 353 posts
    February 7, 2015 7:05 AM PST
    Deadshade said:

     

    The DDs or DOTs for an EQ enchanter were only useful in the lower levels  when one had sometimes to solo even if one didn't want to.

    Beyond these low/mid levels I have never considered an Enchanter as a damage dealing class and I definitely do not wish it to become a damage dealing class. An Enchanter casting DDs in a group is wilfully putting his group in danger because he will run OOM when a bad pull comes.

    And a bad pull will come ;)  Once an EQ Enchanter got a reputation as being of the DD type, he would be facing a very difficult life.

     

    No DDs and no DOTs for enchanters beyond mid level is perfectly OK with me. No elemental spells either.

    Enchanters are masters of the finer spell crafting aiming always to directly or indirectly manipulate, control and coerce minds. They also learn how to provide suitable inanimate matter with magical properties (this is equivalent to "charming" inanimate matter).

     

    Tha's why the decisions about Enchanter spells are very easy to me - can it be conncted with mind control studies and abilities ?

    If yes, then it can be an enchanter's spell (but must not be !)

    If no, then it cannot be an enchanter's spell.

     

    Then, as usual, there will be the one or 2 odd exceptions that don't really fit in enchanter's philosophy but that were designed for class balancing anyway.

    As long as these are only 1 or 2 exceptions, I can live with it.

    so what do enchanters do when facing mobs that have Unusually high resistance to Their CC? like verging on immunity? if they can do no other dps than mental based dps and mobs are immune or nearly immune to mental persuasion of any type? maybe raiding a nest of Mind Flayers? if they have nothing other than mental based abilities how will they contribute to the group? "here's your buffs guys, im gonna sit in the corner and leech xp now!" Now that isnt to say i want them on par dps wise with a real dps class, but some dps is better than just twiddleing our thumbs because we were designed with only Mezz and charm and maybe some dps that is all on the same resist table, when every other caster class will span two or more resist tables.

    • 70 posts
    February 7, 2015 8:14 AM PST

    I think it's important to distinguish the term Psionics from Psionicist.  EQ Enchanters use Psionic abilities, Psionicists use Psionic abilities.  Psionics is a branch of the arcane that uses the mind as it's tool (rather than earth, wind, fire, sprit, evil, good, etc.)  It's interesting to note that all arcane abilities are supposedly manipulated through willpower.. but Psionics is the use of willpower to manipulate *another's* willpower, rather than willpower to manipulate the world directly.  Mind to target mind, rather than mind to fire to target.  This is my take on it anyway... I'd be happy to entertain other theories.. interesting discussion!

     

    As an Enchanter, if I was encountered with the situation mentioned above (an area where mobs were psionic resistant), I would typically charm and maintain an NPC of the proper utility to bring along and effect the physical battle, since the mental battle couldn't be effected.  I remember when the big DDs were introduced in EQ.. it was obvious to the elder enchanters that this was an intentional diversion from our primary path.  Look at the agro that's associated with them.  Their only real use was to finish off a mob, or to one shot a lesser mob that was an annoyance. 

     

    Gawd, your points do bring up an interesting topic..  when the minds of the enemy are impenetrable, what utility will the Enchanter have?  Bare with me here because I'm just brainstorming..   but Enchanter's, being illusionists, can manipulate light.  What if the Enchanter were able to manipulate agro and attack precision through bending light?  Example..  you have a tank attacking psionic resistant mobs.. you have 3 magic users behind the tank that will potentially go down with a single hit from the enemy.  What if the Enchanter were to use light/illusion to make the tank more noticeable and the magic users less noticeable?  And this would be cool..  if the magic user is noticed and the enemy lunges at him, he misses his target due to visible light bending the location of that magic user?  I don't know.. there may be something here.. but again, I'm just riffing.

     

    I recall a great character in the series "The Wheel of Time" by Robert Jordan; Mat Cauthon.  The arcane women of the Aes Sedai were faced with a similar problem in that Mat had acquired an amulet that made him untouchable by the 'one power'.  Their solution was simple and elegant..  the would simply pick up objects telekinetically and hurl them at him when they became frustrated with him LOL.  There may be something usable there as well.  See Psychokinesis. 

    • 1012 posts
    February 7, 2015 8:32 AM PST

    @Gawd,

     

    I don't disagree that they shouldn't have an alternate spell line that falls in a different magic school if resists are high - most classes in EQ did - such as necromancers having alteration and conjuration and enchanters having evocation DDs and alteration for charms/mes etc.; however, I am arguing they shouldn't "share" wizard spells.  If enchanters have spells that jump into the Evocation line - I would want it to be something still enchanter-like such as Mind Blast rather than Shock of Flame, but still be much less damage and mana efficient than any wizard line of spells. 

    • 353 posts
    February 8, 2015 6:04 AM PST
    Raidan said:

    @Gawd,

     

    I don't disagree that they shouldn't have an alternate spell line that falls in a different magic school if resists are high - most classes in EQ did - such as necromancers having alteration and conjuration and enchanters having evocation DDs and alteration for charms/mes etc.; however, I am arguing they shouldn't "share" wizard spells.  If enchanters have spells that jump into the Evocation line - I would want it to be something still enchanter-like such as Mind Blast rather than Shock of Flame, but still be much less damage and mana efficient than any wizard line of spells. 

    At no point in time did i say they should share wizard spells. i have used wizard spells as an "Example" regarding how spell distribution based on the main job focus could be utilized without making everyone a jack of all trades; as i explained once before in this thread. I used the Wizard spells to illustrate a point because they are the easiest caster to guess what kind of template would be used to create it. please when reading posts look at the entire forest and put everything in context, picking out a single tree and shouting "That doesnt belong here" especially after it was explained on later posts just serves to start a thread derailing conversation.

     

    i did however argue that it could be that all those who practice Arcane Power start with simple elemental magic based on Fantasy Lore; that you dont start out in magic summoning demons and controlling the minds of droves of monsters. and that all casters having access to a similar "Basic Magic" wouldn't be out of the question.

    • 466 posts
    February 8, 2015 8:01 AM PST
    Jitai said:

    As an Enchanter, if I was encountered with the situation mentioned above (an area where mobs were psionic resistant), I would typically charm and maintain an NPC of the proper utility to bring along and effect the physical battle, since the mental battle couldn't be effected. 

     

    That.

    Actually this situation is very unlikely to happen anyway because I don't see a group inviting an Enchanter in a zone where mobs are charm and mez resistant.

    They would simply have to rely on root and snare CC and Enchanters would go elsewhere.

    Dragon Necropolis was such a case if I remember well - the rat mobs in the tunnels were mostly totally mez resistant but charmable.

    So an enchanter would either charm (and probably die because these things would 1 or 2 hit kill any enchanter) or simply not be in the tunnel groups.

     

    And of course I have no problem of not being invited to zones where my skills are irrelevant. On the contrary, it makes perfect sense to me.

     

    • 1012 posts
    February 8, 2015 8:02 AM PST
    Gawd said:

     

    At no point in time did i say they should share wizard spells. i have used wizard spells as an "Example" regarding how spell distribution based on the main job focus could be utilized without making everyone a jack of all trades; as i explained once before in this thread. I used the Wizard spells to illustrate a point because they are the easiest caster to guess what kind of template would be used to create it. please when reading posts look at the entire forest and put everything in context, picking out a single tree and shouting "That doesnt belong here" especially after it was explained on later posts just serves to start a thread derailing conversation.

     

    i did however argue that it could be that all those who practice Arcane Power start with simple elemental magic based on Fantasy Lore; that you dont start out in magic summoning demons and controlling the minds of droves of monsters. and that all casters having access to a similar "Basic Magic" wouldn't be out of the question.


    @Gawd

     

    You had mentioned in this thread that you don't take discussions personally, but the tone you present your text on this thread and others suggests otherwise. 

     

    I had read all the previous posts in this thread.  and yes, I did choose the point you made about the enchanter's minor role being casted DPS (wizardy).  I also read your and Jitai's back and forth clarification of the point.    If you read all your posts, I was actually defending your later point that enchanters should have some utility or other options other than sitting if mobs were immune to mes/charm. versus only being able to mes/charm in a group.  I was just placing this idea in EQ contenxt, while discussing your point of Major/Minor roles.  Perhaps I shouldn't have put the share in quotes, I meant to emphasize that point rather than mean you said it - I should have put it into italics.

     

    No worries though, I'll refrain from responding to or derailing any of your conversations in the future. 


    This post was edited by Raidan at February 8, 2015 8:11 AM PST
    • 352 posts
    February 8, 2015 10:13 AM PST

    Just a thought for the enchanter class, I would want an enchanter to keep me safe from a mind flayer. Who better to keep me from attacking my own group than an enchanter/psi when a mind flayer takes over my mind.

    • 70 posts
    February 8, 2015 2:00 PM PST

    I like that idea Kazingathi.. it would stand to reason that a psionic resistant mob would have psionic abilities of their own.. so adding an Enchanter specific buff to strengthen the minds of the group against psionic attack would add to our utility in those areas.  Fine idea!

    • 157 posts
    February 13, 2015 5:18 AM PST
    Kazingathi said:

    Just a thought for the enchanter class, I would want an enchanter to keep me safe from a mind flayer. Who better to keep me from attacking my own group than an enchanter/psi when a mind flayer takes over my mind.


    Seems to me to be clearly the type of defensive buff a chantie would bring to the table!

    • 107 posts
    April 15, 2015 1:08 AM PDT

    Not to ressurect this thread but...

    An enchanter in EQ did a number of things:

     

    The were the only class with a mana regen buff. In a sense it fits in with the idea of mind control. This ability could make casters in a group much more efficient. IMHO this was a big reason why an enchanter might be wanted in a group even if the mobs were charm and mez resistant. With multi-colored mana I'm nor sure what a mana regen buff would look like.

     

    I'm not sure but they may also have had the best haste buff (I think it may have been better than a shamans), causing players to hit much faster. However if you had a shaman in the group they typically took over this role. Again it sort of fits in with a mind control theme.

     

    The stun spells (color flux, etc) along with mez could interrupt casting. If I were to pick one thing I think enchanters should do well it would be interrupt casting. I think it fits in well with the mind control theme. I also just like stun, it has such interesting situational usage.

     

    I loved the pet. There was a certain challenge in learning to work with an uncommandable pet. You could put it away in a group because it was more of a liability than a help.

     

    Of course enchanters could mez and that is what everyone knew them for, but root is often just as effective a crowd control spell, and usable by more classes. If you have the ability to root then mez does not add much other than avoiding the need to pull a mob aside before you root it. Root was also a better spell when faced with mez resistant mobs like giants.

     

    I liked the way charm worked in EQ, it easily broke requiring the enchanter to employ good crowd control abilities to bring the fight back under control. Learning to charm should be about learning to handle the inevitable charm breakage.

     


    This post was edited by Kayd at April 15, 2015 1:11 AM PDT
    • 38 posts
    May 19, 2015 7:31 AM PDT
    Jitai said:

    I'd love to see a mob repeatedly ram it's head into the closest wall.  That would be good crowd control.. damage over time.. and just plain fun!

     

    Taking this idea a step further. I like how EQ2 allowed a chanter to stack spells to up the dps > spell x enhanced the damage of spell y if y was cast within the next 4secs. 

    With this in mind, and mez mobs ramming walls. Howabout an early optional break of CC, So a mezzed mob could be sent 'crazy' and he will charge a wall head face inflicted damage on himself and stunning himself a moment but also breaking his mez. 

    • 144 posts
    April 10, 2016 6:00 AM PDT

    Jitai said:

     

    I'd love to see a mob repeatedly ram it's head into the closest wall.  That would be good crowd control.. damage over time.. and just plain fun!

     

    ROFLMAO!

    LOL, this!  Yes please!

    • 12 posts
    April 19, 2016 2:35 PM PDT

    For me I just want to see the chanter have the mana regen buffs. I enjoyed meeting people through my travels from somone just simply asking for "crack" (in a nice way of course). It was just another route for player to player interactions...simple, but it really was fun feeling like my spells mattered to more then just people in my group. More then that, I enjoy being the mana regen guy, on top of CC. It seperates the enchanter class from any other when you combine those abilities IMO.

    • 17 posts
    July 28, 2016 7:00 PM PDT

    In Lord of the Rings online, loremaster was the CC class. The interesting "utility" skill was mana transfer. The loremaster could leech mana from mobs and could also donate mana to allies when their pool ran low. Some people didn't like being a "battery" for group fights, but when the mechanics demanded it, the teamwork was satsifying.

    • 516 posts
    August 1, 2016 11:31 AM PDT

    I loved being an Enchanter in EQ1.  I always made it a point to think outside the box.  I did very well  : )

    I am wondering now - did any of YOU ever become a pulling chanter?  I could pull better than ANY other class - especially monks!  In regards to that, let me ask, HOW ABOUT ASTRAL PROJECTION?  The object here is that the Enchanter astrally projects and is able to move in an astral form only.  This form will not agro anything.  Basically, it allows you to move forward and scout out an area.  Add an ability to "compell" a mob to move for a limited amount of time.  Basically that means you gain control of the mob and move the mob.  If at ANY time agro is active on the mob - COMPELL is removed with no detriment to the Enchanter.

     

    For instance:

      While grouping, the group moves into a new dungeon.  They form a foothold at the entrence to determine what's going on.  The Enchanter then Astrally Projects and moves forward into the dungeon and checks out the mobs etc. that the group will be facing in the near future.  After getting a lay of the land and the encounters, the Enchanter then selects the SECOND group from the entrence and compells one of the members of the group to move to the front of the dungeon - where the group is waiting for it.  Doing it this way successfully splits the FIRST and THIRD encounters that would have been chain pulled into a 3 encounter pull.  Enchanter is now able to split it into 3 encounters.  Alternatively, the Enchanter could have Compelled the second group deeper into the dungeon while the tank agroed the first encounter.  Since the second encounter is now fully far enough away to ge a safe pull for the group.  After 20 seconds (or when the Enchanter breaks Compell) the encounter then walks back to original placement.

    Honestly, I am not sure about being able to use compell on a named encounter.  That might be too powerful.  Perhaps we allow a Compell with a random break - and if it DOES randomly break - the named builds an immediate X amount of agro on the Enchanter etc.

     

    Now, as for illusions - i loved old-school illusions.  They seemed to each come with some form of self buff that made it worthwhile.  Things like Ultravision for Dark Elf illusion.  And so on.  That was always pretty awesome.  Not to mention that it gave an immediate balancing to factions with the targetted illusion.  I would love to see more of that.

     

    I also played Vanguard.  LOVED it!  I would like to see more on the development of Mindspy.  The DD for the CC crowd has always been a little low.  I would like the Enchanter to have the ability to steal a spell from a mob and if successful - keep that ability for a time.  And the time should be adjustable based on a number of things.  Difference in levels between the Enchanter and the mob, the level of the spell the Enchanter is stealing, whether or not the Enchanter has completed some epic quest line that improves the durability of Mindspy (or whatever we are going to call it), etc.

    As for Charm itself, I would like some changes to the mechanics behind it.  When charm wears off, the targetted mobs should continue to beat and destroy the formally charmed mob.  However, once the formerally charmed is dead, the Enchanter gets a MASSIVE agro penalty and the remaining mobs get a pretty hefty buff to attack speed etc.  The formally charmed mob should get the enrage bonus and target the Enchanter with no possibility of agro removal.

    Another thing I would like to see:  Detect Sentience.  Think of this as a tracking type spell that will only detect sentient mobs of a certain level range depending on the level of the ability of the Enchanter.  Along this same line, I would like to have a Detect Psionics spell.  Basically, if a mob has a buff on another mob - the Enchanter should be able to detect the "ley line" between the casting mob and mob that is being buffed.  I do NOT think that the Enchanter should be able to detect BLESSINGS - that should probably go to some sort of cleric.

    Enchanters in EQ were able to summon bottles of mana that were used for crafting.  I would like to see this continue.  At the same time, I would like the bottles to be TEMP only and should be able to hand out to group mates as a means of power replenishment.  Some suitability nees to be implemented of course...

     

    There is a lot more we could discuss but I think I would need more info like character attributes etc. before continuing...

     

    • 157 posts
    August 18, 2017 9:59 AM PDT

    Jitai said:

    I don't think the Enchanter should be synonymous in any way with a Wizard.  Looking at it as "The Enchanter is another kind of wizard with different spells" kind of diminishes the class.  All Enchanter abilities should be based on mind control (their mind and others' minds), nothing elemental.  I don't see this as being potentially restrictive, just distinctive.  The psionic category should be the litmus test for Enchanter spells.

    If Pantheon does mob resists like they did in Vanguard, The Enchanter will need more types of damage than just psionic, otherwise when we come up against a mob thats immune to that type of damage we're rendered useless. Especially if its a raid mob.


    This post was edited by Keiiek at August 18, 2017 11:20 AM PDT
    • 143 posts
    February 6, 2018 8:39 PM PST
    I love the mind spy idea to steal spells... I think it should be permanent untill you want a different spell or mem a new spell on your spell book.

    I would like to see charm and mez the same as EQ... The greater the risk the more reward you get...

    I think the game and our mechanics should be fun not a daunting task...

    Oh I also like that pentagram idea over the head for mez.. they probably will not do it but I like the idea....
    • 157 posts
    March 7, 2018 5:05 PM PST

    i just had an idea for an Enchanter ability. It would kind of work like Bind Sight from EQ1 where you'd cast it on an enemy and your sight would transfer to the enemy and you could see what it sees for a short time. With this ability, though, you would transfer yourself into an enemy, leaving your body behind, and be able to play as that enemy for a short period of time. You would gain access to its skills/abilities and be able to move it around and attack. When the spell fades in battle, it would agro the Enchanter unless taunted/ mind wiped/ or otherwise agro affected. If attacked by a groupmate, say the tank, it would knock you out of the target and back into your body. If you were soloing using this ability and attacked another mob with it, and it faded mid-fight, both mobs would cease fighting each other and turn to attack the Enchanter. If cast on an enemy and you don't attack anything with it, and it fades, the target would return to its spawn/pathing point. Give it a small chance of agroing back to the caster unless you meet a CHA check for a little risk vs. reward. This would be a great scouting/pulling tool, and i can't see it being too OP if the recast time was long enough. It would have a kickass name like "Become Thine Enemy" Any thoughts on this?


    This post was edited by Keiiek at March 7, 2018 5:27 PM PST