Spiritshields

Carivah

So to confirm, @Daskalos, you're fine with all the living, non-undead Spinesreach citizens getting the shield and then fighting Enorian with the defense up?

Seir

While it may sound callous, it benefits no one to indulge one individual having a legacy class because they may want to be special.

Maybe I wanted to keep old Sentinel and not the new skillsets? Never was an option, nor should it have been because it would've been nightmarish to balance and account for as time went on. Like I said, provided a refund of all of her lessons is given (which I doubt would be a problem) then I see no reason for someone to be upset because they're not losing anything in the process. Roleplay is what you make out of it and does not hinge ENTIRELY on someone's class. If it does, you're doing it wrong.

Edit: And to add, I'm really trying not to sound callous again but I don't even remotely see why this is a problem or a question. An outlier, however small, exists that shouldn't because of a legacy class that should've been gone ages ago and since the precedent of getting rid of legacy abilities (see Metamorphosis) has pretty much been established, there's no reason that this one should exist. I don't even care about rogue Teradrim or what have you because it's largely irrelevant and offers no solution to the perceived "problem". Get rid of the outlier like we have for every other legacy class and give the Priest a refund in lessons. Her roleplay won't be impacted because no one bases their roleplay entirely around their class because if they WERE in this case, they'd be violating the very core roleplay of a Priest by collaborating with undeath and shadow, whose existence is anathema to what they stand for.

Tina

Last I knew bliss gave four defenses, toughness for physical damage, resistance for magic, fitness for asthma, and constitution, which prevented all vomiting/hunger attacks.

Daskalos

If Haven were to begin fighting with Loch regularly with Luminary and Spirit tether classes, I would begin pushing to remove his Angel as has been done in the past. Either we're tethered or we're not. Also, I have no  problem with removing them from everyone. They're not taken into account when balancing, and thus, remove them from the equation. I think I answered previously that the artifact should be treated the same. Also, remove Epicurus (I'm fine with that) and we'll find out which classes are tanky and which get by because of Epicurus (I know before I started using Epi and Orbs I felt squishy in Templar).

I would hope that we, as a playerbase, are mature enough not to simply exploit loopholes 'because we can'. But I am being proven wrong.

Arbre

Daskalos said:

I would hope that we, as a playerbase, are mature enough not to simply exploit loopholes 'because we can'. But I am being proven wrong.

This bothers me when you talk about griefing people in the same thread.

Daskalos

Have you seen me actually do it? I told several people immediately it wasn't a course of action via IM's. However, Veovis wants me to play the PK-whore troll I was 8 years ago, so I figured I'd play it up a bit. Also, I never talked about griefing someone. I talked about PK'ing someone for endangering the Age of Dawn.

Areka

I think everyone needs to unwad their knickers and take a hard look at how they would want things to change if the shoe was on the other foot and then come back and collaborate for the game as a whole's betterment rather than individual benefit's betterment, on all fields. 

The baiting - and yes, there has been some, even if it's subtle, on both 'sides' is really unnecessary, as are the high horses when you're just drawing out opinions so you can disagree with them. Stop making things personal. This feels like the class dispensation thread and a peen war on a conversation that no one wants to really have because everyone wants their slice (and some slices induce egoallergy in others).

I prefer funfetti, for slice preference, but we do not have enough confetti for it to be here. 

And I need to do this reflection too. 

Calipso

Seir said:

While it may sound callous, it benefits no one to indulge one individual having a legacy class because they may want to be special.

Maybe I wanted to keep old Sentinel and not the new skillsets? Never was an option, nor should it have been because it would've been nightmarish to balance and account for as time went on. Like I said, provided a refund of all of her lessons is given (which I doubt would be a problem) then I see no reason for someone to be upset because they're not losing anything in the process. Roleplay is what you make out of it and does not hinge ENTIRELY on someone's class. If it does, you're doing it wrong.

Edit: And to add, I'm really trying not to sound callous again but I don't even remotely see why this is a problem or a question. An outlier, however small, exists that shouldn't because of a legacy class that should've been gone ages ago and since the precedent of getting rid of legacy abilities (see Metamorphosis) has pretty much been established, there's no reason that this one should exist. I don't even care about rogue Teradrim or what have you because it's largely irrelevant and offers no solution to the perceived "problem". Get rid of the outlier like we have for every other legacy class and give the Priest a refund in lessons. Her roleplay won't be impacted because no one bases their roleplay entirely around their class because if they WERE in this case, they'd be violating the very core roleplay of a Priest by collaborating with undeath and shadow, whose existence is anathema to what they stand for.

I frankly feel it would be unfair to her, and perhaps the other 'legacy' class players, to simply take away the class they were told they can keep. Back then they were given the option (including infernal and templar) that they can embrace the new or stick with the old. Who are we to suddenly take away the decision they made (most likely not without a lot of thought on their part)? They were promised they could keep their class, and frankly it seems some of these players (Take into account Fauzell and his infernal class) mostly play because they got to KEEP the class they love and the class they invested their time into the game.

Im sorry but stripping the "legacy outlier classes" is just a big No in my opinion.

Daskalos

You don't strip them, but it is possible to make them ineffective. Look at Paladin\Infernal. If you lose your falcon, which is a huge part of their combat, it's gone for good.

Calipso

Daskalos said:

You don't strip them, but it is possible to make them ineffective. Look at Paladin\Infernal. If you lose your falcon, which is a huge part of their combat, it's gone for good.

I really feel bad for those paladins and infernals that somehow lose their falcons and wish there was some way they could get it back

I mean truth be told, I would expect players to have a little respect for the individual and not destroy their entire legacy class by slaying a non-replacable pet.

Daskalos

The falcons have built in safeguards. Attacking the falcon has long been a viable strategy to take it out as it's annoying as crap to fight against. If players ignore the safeguard (calling it back after it flees from low health) then it's their own fault.

Ferrik

Daskalos said:

Also, I have no  problem with removing them from everyone. They're not taken into account when balancing, and thus, remove them from the equation. I think I answered previously that the artifact should be treated the same. Also, remove Epicurus (I'm fine with that)

I'm not entirely sure. I actually thought that a coder or admin once mentioned they -DO- take all accessible skills in account when balancing. Either way a moot point because this particular case is a small gimmick.

Only problem is that now, whoever has the artifact will be too frightened to speak up.

Daskalos said:

I would hope that we, as a playerbase, are mature enough not to simply exploit loopholes 'because we can'. But I am being proven wrong.

Unfortunately, this is Aetolia. Every side has its moments (and or rather people) ruining things for others, letting other people not get their way they want.

People do not care at all for as long as they get a fight it is good. A chance for acknowledgement or confirmation of their disagreement or disliking of point A, B or C.

This is the problem of the forums inherently. It is the only venue where public opinions may be asked for and put together. Issues nor liaisons can solve this. One is not the proper place, the other will be biased. Still, the subtle vitriol is under the surface here too and-- oh look at that:

Areka said:

I think everyone needs to unwad their knickers and take a hard look at how they would want things to change if the shoe was on the other foot and then come back and collaborate for the game as a whole's betterment rather than individual benefit's betterment, on all fields. 

The baiting - and yes, there has been some, even if it's subtle, on both 'sides' is really unnecessary, as are the high horses when you're just drawing out opinions so you can disagree with them. Stop making things personal. This feels like the class dispensation thread and a peen war on a conversation that no one wants to really have because everyone wants their slice (and some slices induce egoallergy in others).

I wish that even in discussions like these it could be productive, where every post only -adds- to the discussion in a constructive way or perhaps only asks for clarification or provides a good counter-point (to the discussion, not the person).

I sort of tried. But I'm not World Police, neither is anyone in this thread.

Xavin

Daskalos said:

The falcons have built in safeguards. Attacking the falcon has long been a viable strategy to take it out as it's annoying as crap to fight against. If players ignore the safeguard (calling it back after it flees from low health) then it's their own fault.

There's still an aviary in the templar guildhall. I don't know if it's functional.

Areka

And I can't do anything with it, even redesc it, because it's marked as property of the Paladins and we're not the Paladins. Hrmph! So I redesigned the tower to accommodate it kinda!

Veovis

Daskalos said:

Have you seen me actually do it? I told several people immediately it wasn't a course of action via IM's. However, Veovis wants me to play the PK-whore troll I was 8 years ago, so I figured I'd play it up a bit. Also, I never talked about griefing someone. I talked about PK'ing someone for endangering the Age of Dawn.

I don't want you to do that, nor have I said or implied that I did. I think you're just trolling now.

Jensen

Congratulations, there's now a 4 page thread over a relatively minor defense buff that threatening to grief pk someone into the ground -and- force them to completely change their 300+ years of RP and character identity.

I'm ashamed to be an Aetolian with you.  good job guys.

Arbre

Unfortunately, I think it's about that time.  Don't go back over to the rage thread with this either.