Deadshade said:Jitai said:
The most amazing aspect of the EQ Enchanter for me was that some people were very good enchanters and some people just weren't.
I respectfully but very strongly disagree.
In EQ there were only good and very good enchanters.
And it couldn't have been otherwise. By design there was no other class that was able to generate an immediate and horrible wipeout than an enchanter.
The natural selection made it so that (potentially) bad enchanters died out LOOOOONG before 30 or so.
This is also the reason why I have always considered that the EQ enchanter design was the best, the most differentiated and most realistic class design ever.
I have to disagree with you on the part about there only being good or very good chanters. I saw some pretty terrible chanters. Chanter was my main class, but I did eventually make a nec, rng, bard, wiz, and a rog just to say I added variety, I never got serious with them bc chanting was my thing, and the rest was just boring to me. I only grouped with 1 or 2 chanters that weren't useless. If a chanter said, "we are just buff bots bc they nerfed us" I didn't want them in my group, and that was a common problem post-POP nerfs on xegony. it sucked, but tbh, (sigh) never thought i'd speak this out loud, but that nerf was needed. 2 decent chanters charming in drunder shouldn't be able to make a raid win or lose against RZ, but it did. After the Nerf i think it was something silly like, 3 decent chanters charming made the difference...seriously though, those buffed pets were literally twice the dps of the rest of the raid in same cases. it was just silly. instead of a blanket nerf, they could have just nerfed charm effects if the chanter was in a raid, but I guess the (knee) Jerks just did the quickest and easiest fix?
Anyway, there were some terrible chanters out there, you must have just been really lucky or blessed to have so many good-very good ones on your server.
*changed POT to drunder, realizing may be mistaken for PoTime instead of Tactics ;)
Somthing that I have noticed in EQ99.. charmed mobs didnt use some skills in their repertoire when charmed, most importantly heals. So whilst charmed they wouldnt heal themselves or others unless charm broke then they might heal them selves or other mobs if they are low. In the newer version of EQ they have changed it so they mobs heal themselves and also group members when charmed. I really love this feature! Without this feature there is hardly any reason to charm an orc shaman because you get all the limitations of that class (being lower HP's / AC or whatever) but you dont get their primary ability! I would really love Pantheon to include the full range of the mobs abilites (once charmed) and also the AI of those abilities to be used included with charming (healing at 50%, buffing itself when buffs run out or whatever it is)! I hope this is the case!
Is there a good case against this? Is this me being too greedy? A pet that heals itself and also injured group members is extremely useful but is this.. too useful? ;)
Hokanu said:Somthing that I have noticed in EQ99.. charmed mobs didnt use some skills in their repertoire when charmed, most importantly heals. So whilst charmed they wouldnt heal themselves or others unless charm broke then they might heal them selves or other mobs if they are low. In the newer version of EQ they have changed it so they mobs heal themselves and also group members when charmed. I really love this feature! Without this feature there is hardly any reason to charm an orc shaman because you get all the limitations of that class (being lower HP's / AC or whatever) but you dont get their primary ability! I would really love Pantheon to include the full range of the mobs abilites (once charmed) and also the AI of those abilities to be used included with charming (healing at 50%, buffing itself when buffs run out or whatever it is)! I hope this is the case!
Is there a good case against this? Is this me being too greedy? A pet that heals itself and also injured group members is extremely useful but is this.. too useful? ;)
Charming in EQ was always dangerous. Charming a shaman class for instance... the shaman still hit like a truck. All mobs hit hard, and that's a good thing, it makes them a nice challenge.
Charming in a group, however, was always a risk, have been in hundreds of groups where a charmed pet would also break at the worst time and kill the enchanter while it was trying to CC a bad pull.
So I think EQ charm was fine the way it was, it was a very high risk, high reward thing to do. Buffing it... was an insane risk, but the dmg output was also insane.
Honestly, i think multiple charms should increase the length and lessen the chance of charm breaking. As horrible as it is, we get used to thing pretty quickly, and while killing someone we normally wouldn't would hurt us... after 5 hours of being forced to do it you get used to it and just accept it, or get numb to the whole idea... war in the real world has taught us that much.
You should be able to charm a mob and have it at full strength, if you buff it and it breaks, well, too bad, so sad. You've got a mini-boss to deal with. When a mob is charmed, you should have full use of its entire repetoire of skills/ spells.
It should be difficult to charm intelligent humanoid mobs. Maybe being able to land a charm on a mob should be based off of a few different factors. Your charisma and intelligence and the mobs intelligence, will, and sv vs magic/ psionics. It shouldn't be too easy for you to charm up a healer and bring it along with you. it should be fighting your will the entire time. Maybe even have a charmed pet only spell called Mind Lash that you occasionally have to cast to keep your charmed mob under your control. I dont know if this should be represented with a "willpower" inticator, or just have to guess at it. That spell should cost a nice chunk of mana to use. Lesser willed creatures, you wouldn't have to Mind Lash so much.
There should still be a random chance of your charm just breaking.
Charmed mobs should retain their factions. if you run into an Elf city with a Skar mob charmed, they should attack it.
You should be able to loot and place items on a charmed mob. If the mob is humanoid, it should use weapons and armor traded to it.
Boss mobs should probably not be charmable, but if so, it should be hella difficult.
That's all i can think of at the moment :)
The charm mechanic is, for me and people like me, one of the most FUN mechanics ever to surface in any RPG. Properly implemented charm (whether it's a skill of the Enchanter, Summoner, Mage, Necromancer, or any combination of the above) would make me feel like I was playing an MMO back in the golden years. By properly implemented I mean:
1) Reward players who are willing to put in the time to attempt charms on all monsters in every nook and crannie. This is a LOT of time spent/deaths and the most fun part of charm for me is discovering which monsters I can charm, what their abilities are, and figuring out how I can best use them in groups or during a solo session. I fully realize that not long after launch there will be charm guides out for min/maxers who don't want to discover it themselves, but those folks will probably still enjoy the versatility offered by the pet class IF they're willing to put in the work to play such a complex class (see below).
2) Allow multiple styles of charm play. Assuming I put the work in, I should be able to charm a tanky monster that has a pull ability and spend ALL of my efforts making that monster off-tank in a group. I shouldn't be good for anything else while acting as a mediocre off-tank vicariously through my pet (which I chose specifically for this purpose, and traveled to it specifically to charm it for this reason). We don't want overpowered charmers but we do want versatility! Conversely I should be able to buff myself with magical shields/armor and charm a single hard-hitting monster for DPS during solo play, or perhaps charm two or more lower level hitters instead. It's always fun to charm a tanky pet, add some defensive buffs to it (but not drain ALL your mana on that, as you might do if you wanted to create an off-tank in a group for example) and stand behind that tanky mob while mildly DPSing with your spells in a solo session. Another really fun strategy is allowing players to charm one lower level tanky pet and another (or two) lower level DPS pet(s) if that's your fancy. In the latter case, I'd probably split my buffs between some tanky buffs for the tanky mob and some DPS buffs for the DPSing monster(s) while debuffing the enemies (and doing this should exhaust my resources).
Having the ability to mix and match pet(s) and buffs/debuffs to taste is RIDICULOUSLY fun! It also changes as your level increases because the monsters around you are always different! Can I charm one Ogre youth to tank solo for me and two dragon hatchlings for DPS? Damn, I only got one dragon hatchling and one ogre youth, still pretty good! Could I possibly sneak into that nest and charm one really nasty hard-hitting giant bird without being noticed by the rest of the monsters there? What if I charmed that strong axe-wielding dwarf and took him into that forest full of aggressive trees over there? These guys hit really hard... Maybe I should run back one zone and grab that really tough tortoise mob to tank for me in this area, and I should remember these hard hitters in case my group needs DPS later...
Part of the allure is charming monsters to find out what they're all about, how their defense/attacks work and how to best shoehorn them into a situation to make the best of it. This rewards cleverness and time invested (say I charm a fire elemental and use it to tank a fiery dungeon, as it's resistant to fire). It requires technical players who enjoy lots of planning and setup for their pets, and it's an absolutely FANTASTIC way to enjoy a game like this.
All of this I've described requires the ability to charm for longer durations than was possible in EQ. It also suggests that we can heal our pet after or during a fight to keep it around. I'm not suggesting that once you charm a monster it's yours until you log off. I'm just saying charms that last long enough to make it through a raid boss without re-charming (if you refreshed your charm right before the fight starts) would be asbolutely brilliant!
In closing I'd just like to reiterate that some of the fun found in the older MMOs that has since been lost stems from rewarding cleverness and tactics. Charm is an AWESOME way to do this, because it allows very technical and deep-thinking players to make the best of their surroundings or to travel far and wide in search of the perfect pet for a specific encounter or dungeon. We are rewarded for our hard work and diligence with versatility and the ability to find groups as a consequence. You need an off-tank for that dungeon? Give me a port over there and 10 minutes! Now you need CC? Take a pee break and I'll be back before we're ready to start!
To be clear, I don't want charm to offer better (or even equal) tanking capability over a player warrior, nor do I want pets to out-DPS a player rogue. The ability to hold our own without stealing the thunder from other players is probably the right balance. Groups shouldn't disband because they can't find an off-tank as long as a *insert charming class here with clever player* is present, as they can fill the role (not as well, admittedly) until a player is found.
On that last note, I think the charming class should still be useful in groups even when you have a real player healer, tank, dps and utility. Perhaps this is the utility aspect, as enchanters had in EQ. I don't know, I'm just after balance along with the deep and exceptionally fun experience I've described above. :)
Cheers!
A really good Enchanter in EQ always had a charmed pet of some kind. The increase in DPS for a group was substantial and controlling the situation correctly when it broke separated the boys from the men. You could still mezz like a champ AND control your charmed pet at the same time.
The design in EQ was Really Good and as stated earlier, was very obvious to see who played it to the extreme and who was along for the buffing.
Hopefully they don't gimp charm into the ground in some haphazzard attmept at balancing out a class who's bread and butter is taking mobs at highrisk to themselves and the group for a tasty DPS boost. What I'm truly excited about is the chanters building the solo artist challenge! So excited to the best of the best doing testing there metal and dieing a ton! I for one hope that is possible!!
Gawd said:Charms arent really my cup of tea. but that being said i dont believe in the random duration charms. now depreciating values i do believe in. if we charm or mezz a mob then the effect of the next charm or mezz whould be lowered.
I would like two types. One being a charm that requires a percentage of manapool to maintain. When charmed, the creature is tuned to 65-70% of the strength of the Mage pets for instance. It recieves all the abilities from that particular creature though. This pet can be controlled. Then you have a random charm which allows you to turn a mob on other mobs randomly. It carries your signature so it can't attack a mezzed target nor can it be attacked by players. The charmed mob retains its power but cannot be controlled and this version has a static duration depending on level of the spell. Ranges can be 5-10 seconds.
Considering how mez has a much shorter duration than in EQ1, I'd bet they aren't going to let multiples to be charmed.
As for our old Animation pets. The dynamic should be different. You can animate a weapon like a staff or 2 hander or a 1 hander and shield. When you're attacked the animation immediately clings to you and absorbs impact to its health and attacks the target back with the weapon if it's a sword and shield. If it's a 2 hander it clings to you and attacks the target for twice the damage but is unable to block damage and instead has a chance to parry. A staff does the same thing but instead mitigates spell damage when you're attacked.
I always felt the Animation pets should have replaced the self Rune line of spells. That dynamic would work beautifully with regard to the name of the class.
Had an EQ enchanter during the Velious era and it was probably my favorite alt. Locking down like 12 mobs in Karnor's, not letting a single enemy spell get cast, turning your friends into blenders, being pretty much universally adored - it was awesome.
I'm sorry to say, the class was also completely broken. No other class even came close, and much of that was due to charm. The fact that it's an amazing griefing tool is not even the main problem, rather the fact that you now had a pet that could literally do more damage than the rest of your party, take more damage than your tank, et cetera. It let you solo things noone else could.
The fact that charm could break at a bad time was just not a real drawback, not when examined next to its power and not when the class had all the tools to deal with a break to begin with.
If we see a charm ability in Pantheon, I personally hope that the charmed entity is massively scaled down to what would be acceptable for the pet of an enchanter - which would be significantly weaker than a magician's pet.