Weapon Buffing Spells Change

[Flower Power]

This change was primarily because low level content is not balanced for +5 weapons and GMW trivialized it.

The existence of Premonition-using, dispel-spamming, Heal-and-G-Resto spamming monsters in pre-epic dungeons suggests to me that this isn't necessarily the case. If you really want to get rid of having timely and reliable access to +5 weapons, lower level dungeons should be revisited to remove aspects of them that require having +5 weapons for counterplay.

I'd also argue that this doesn't do anything to help make low-level smithing viable or desirable for one simple reason: iron and steel weapons still suck. By the time I can personally cast GMW (short of getting a lucky break finding +5 Lore rings early), I'm already getting +3 Enhancement bonus out of my cheap, cheap GMW scrolls - and I can buy 14 scrolls for the average market price of a single steel weapon.

When it comes down to it, I'm still left with the choice of dropping a chunk of change on an incredibly mediocre weapon - or buying enough scrolls of +3 Enhancement bonus all at once to last me through to being able to use greensteel or m. damask, and it's still no contest.

[Xerah]

I always go through the same approach:

Bronze
1d4 acid/fire OR iron (if I find it in time)
Steel w/ +2 essence
MSteel (if I find silver) w/ +2 essence
Greensteel/damask w/ +4 essence

I just went through this exact approach again over the past month with a new character.

It sounds like people know the module so well that they go so fast through content (which is helped by +5 weapons). That's totally fine, but you also have to realize that things aren't designed around that approach.

[NauVaseline]

The change was largely because people were running around with +5 keen weapons as low as level 3-5 and the content is not designed for this. This gave a huge advantage to veteran players that knew the 'trick' of just making a keen sword in the basin and then using it with scrolls until high levels, over newbies who assumed they needed to buy a better sword to do more damage.

This change was primarily because low level content is not balanced for +5 weapons and GMW trivialized it.

The discrepancy between these two statements, combined with the usage of years-outdated information gives the impression this justification was not thought through. Additionally...

Yes but it should have been +2 for a level 5 character. Please verify.

I mean, it hasn't always. I really don't think an artificial change to 'force' certain weapon tier use is the answer, either, especially not without an included examination of why people don't bother with the bronze to m-steel pipeline.

...I would argue that capping how effective an epic caster's GMW is on lower level player character's is one of the more significant changes of the update and should've been documented. Also, the low-balled cap feels dirty

A good change to blacksmithing would be providing templates of a metal type: iron template, steel template, etc. and allow the buyer to choose the weapon shape. Add in a magic weapon scroll and alchemist fire to the recipe to represent the transformation to make it mesh, or something. It would increase blacksmithing as a trade and make it easier for consumers to find their specific weapon of choice.

+1

[Wuthering]

Honestly the thing the server wasn't designed for is giving every single character easy access to level 3 and lower scrolls. Before, casting GMW from scrolls was the domain of rogues, bards, clerics and spellswords and wasn't overpowered since they have low damage and low AB at early levels. The problem we're seeing now is because non-caster, non UMD melees can cast GMW, mage armor, ghostly visage and summon 3/animate dead cheaply and easily as soon as they can pull of 15 lore. How can that not make almost all sub-level 10 content a cakewalk even with the GMW change?

[DangerDolphin]

The discrepancy between these two statements, combined with the usage of years-outdated information gives the impression this justification was not thought through.

Then your impression would be wrong. The issue was thought through and will continue to be adjusted based on feedback, such as in this thread. If you believe the progression of GMW or other spells needs to be different than the table I posted earlier in the thread then I am interested in your thoughts, but I think giving a +2 weapon to a level 5 character is pretty generous.

There is no discrepancy between the statements. I'll explain it again so it's clear for you:
The low level content in Arelith is not designed for +5 weapons. This makes it very easy. New players generally do not know they can enchant a +5 weapon and we are not going to make every area more difficult to support people using them, so the enhancement had to be capped.

...I would argue that capping how effective an epic caster's GMW is on lower level player character's is one of the more significant changes of the update and should've been documented. Also, the low-balled cap feels dirty

This was added as a preventive measure to stop people trying to get around the cap. I didn't add it in the patch notes because I didn't think it would come up tbh - most players can, and do manage low level writs without going to an epic level character for help.

[NauVaseline]

There is no discrepancy between the statements.

"Your eyes and ears are lying to you"

The change was largely because people were running around with +5 keen weapons as low as level 3-5 and the content is not designed for this. This gave a huge advantage to veteran players that knew the 'trick' of just making a keen sword in the basin and then using it with scrolls until high levels, over newbies who assumed they needed to buy a better sword to do more damage.

This change was primarily because low level content is not balanced for +5 weapons and GMW trivialized it.

Yea, no discrepancy whatsoever. lmfao

I didn't add it in the patch notes because I didn't think it would come up tbh

Honest mistake, but again, this gives the wrong impression that this wasn't thought through to it's conclusion.

- most players can, and do manage low level writs without going to an epic level character for help.

If it's such a fringe case what's the big deal with allowing a higher cap?

I am not against this update per se, and can see the need to keep people from being able to pop off a scroll and have +5 weapons at level 3, but the logic behind putting the kabosh on caster's casting their helpful GMW's on lowbie's that've interacted with them seems flaccid and overzealous.

[DangerDolphin]

- most players can, and do manage low level writs without going to an epic level character for help.

If it's such a fringe case what's the big deal with allowing a higher cap?

I am not against this update per se, and can see the need to keep people from being able to pop off a scroll and have +5 weapons at level 3, but the logic behind putting the kabosh on caster's casting their helpful GMW's on lowbie's that've interacted with them seems flaccid and overzealous.

For the same reason you can't complete a sewer rat writ with an epic level wizard in your party killing everything for you. And the same reason you get 1xp per kill with them in party. A character that has been coddled with ultra-powerful enchantments won't be experiencing challenge while adventuring and shouldn't gain experience from it.

There is already strong precedent for this change, as we already have weapons with a minimum level on them. It just wasn't implemented onto temporary effects.

[Chosen Son]

I really like the change. Not only do +5 weapons trivialize low level content for the player using it, it trivializes it for everyone else in the party too. It also allows you to leapfrog writs, ignoring many you might otherwise want to do, because you are unable to take on harder challenges. +5 Weapons at low levels was just really disruptive, to the early game experience and I am really happy to see them go.

[Baron Saturday]

The change was largely because people were running around with +5 keen weapons as low as level 3-5 and the content is not designed for this. This gave a huge advantage to veteran players that knew the 'trick' of just making a keen sword in the basin and then using it with scrolls until high levels, over newbies who assumed they needed to buy a better sword to do more damage.

This change was primarily because low level content is not balanced for +5 weapons and GMW trivialized it.

Yea, no discrepancy whatsoever. lmfao

Having read those statements multiple times, I still have no idea what discrepancy you're pointing out.

Edit:

For the same reason you can't complete a sewer rat writ with an epic level wizard in your party killing everything for you. And the same reason you get 1xp per kill with them in party. A character that has been coddled with ultra-powerful enchantments won't be experiencing challenge while adventuring and shouldn't gain experience from it.

Just about any buffs from a higher level character is going to trivialize early game content, though. Should we expect further changes to how spells from higher level characters affect lower levels? Because that seems like a tricky path to go down.

[DangerDolphin]

Edit:

For the same reason you can't complete a sewer rat writ with an epic level wizard in your party killing everything for you. And the same reason you get 1xp per kill with them in party. A character that has been coddled with ultra-powerful enchantments won't be experiencing challenge while adventuring and shouldn't gain experience from it.

Just about any buffs from a higher level character is going to trivialize early game content, though. Should we expect further changes to how spells from higher level characters affect lower levels? Because that seems like a tricky path to go down.

There are no plans to change buffs other than weapon ones. The others are largely defensive so have less of an impact.

[Drowboy]

I appreciate you being forthright, here, DangerDolphin, and I think a lot of the guff you're getting isn't really yours. Mostly, it's the fact that at some point, the team's going to have to acknowledge that the umd change had a hell of a lot of unintended if entirely predictable side-effects, that a bunch of well-intentioned devs are getting tasked to whack-a-mole-ing in front of a playerbase that just kind of wants the game to be normal. (And are occasionally not super kind about it)

[Xerah]

I have no idea why you keep pushing this idea that team thought there was going to be no changes as a result of the UMD change.

[Biolab00]

Is it just my misconception that the only reason why scroll use was changed to lore, isn't really due to mechanic of PVP but because lore skill is seriously under-rated before the change?

I mean, previously, lore simply exist just for the sake of language ( sometimes insignificant since you can still learn language with very minimal lore score of 10 ) and probably some identifying. I supposed that there's probably like say 10% of the people that invest lore for the sake of investigation and another 20% is that they have too much excess skill points to spare.

Now though, the use of lore is greatly amplified which i think is a good thing.
Those that take UMD isn't just for the wand but also to wear those equipment that have UMD restriction. Of course, that belongs to the minority.

I think, the changes to lore, wasn't really taking PVP into much consideration in the first place, since, the point of it, is so that majority of the player feel that it's worthwhile, to invest in Lore except a minority few ( such as myself. I'm a sucker )

[dallion43]

Lets just say the *hidden* change was done to prevent weapon alt-buffing.
I am not sure how much of an issue it is, but where there is a door, some will enter.

Counting on GMW from a *passerby* mage that can rest at any given moment or lvling with big lvl discrepancy at low lvls is not such a common occurrence, imho.

P.C
I think when giving feedback to a dev that is promptly responsive to the extent we seen in this topic, it is best to be as delicate as possible when posting input. We want to keep the dev promptly responsive for future discussions :p.
Just an imho, of course, no offense.

[Aelryn Bloodmoon]

Will second that the tone in this thread could be much nicer. I also greatly appreciate the responsive dialogue on the subject.

Edit:

For the same reason you can't complete a sewer rat writ with an epic level wizard in your party killing everything for you. And the same reason you get 1xp per kill with them in party. A character that has been coddled with ultra-powerful enchantments won't be experiencing challenge while adventuring and shouldn't gain experience from it.

Just about any buffs from a higher level character is going to trivialize early game content, though. Should we expect further changes to how spells from higher level characters affect lower levels? Because that seems like a tricky path to go down.

There are no plans to change buffs other than weapon ones. The others are largely defensive so have less of an impact.

On this line of thought- I see where you're going with it- but if I can run with it the other way for a moment, let's take the scenario where the guard captain goes out with his squad of greenhorns. They are, as you pointed out, already receiving 1XP/kill because the level 30 guard captain trivializes the bandits by reassuring them that if anything goes wrong he's there to get their bacon out of the fire.

So... why can't they have the +5 weapons if the guard captain is a level 30 mage taking his ducklings out on a teamwork building exercise? They're already getting the 1 XP, and having those +5 weapons for the duration of that trip might give them a taste of things to come/work towards. It also looks pretty bad that the captain in this case can only provide a +2 weapon, when they might be able to buy a greensteel one already if they've been saving up their gift of wealth.

If the concern is the drive by buffs on the way out of the gate, could the increased caster level effect be tied to a minimum duration of screen time with the caster without too many coding gymnastics?

[NauVaseline]

Having read those statements multiple times, I still have no idea what discrepancy you're pointing out.

The primary (although it is worded as 'main' the first time) reason went from being "people were running around with +5 keen basin-enchanted weapons as low as level 3 -5/veteran players had a huge advantage that knew the basin trick" to just "GMW trivializes early game content". Edit: To be clear, I am on board with what the justification was changed to, but being told "There is no discrepancy" when there is clearly one is frustrating/insulting. It's gaslighting.

There is already strong precedent for this change, as we already have weapons with a minimum level on them. It just wasn't implemented onto temporary effects.

Because they are temporary.

[AstralUniverse]

You can still give the epic character your sword and a scroll and you'll get it back with a +5 on it right? Or am I missing something?

[Morgy]

You can still give the epic character your sword and a scroll and you'll get it back with a +5 on it right? Or am I missing something?

My 9bard/4BG cast GMW on himself and got +4, cast it on a level ?3 and it gave +1. I imagine handing it over beforehand would give the same buff though, yes.

[Ork]

He just mentioned that that would be corrected. Don't expect to be able to gift low characters with +5 weapons.

[AstralUniverse]

He just mentioned that that would be corrected. Don't expect to be able to gift low characters with +5 weapons.

I'm in favour of making it so when the weapon is passed, the bonus is changed to respond to the new wielder's CL, just in terms of the bonus if that's possible to code. The duration should still be cl 15 if scroll or whatever the caster's CL is.

[NauVaseline]

I'd feel like I was exploiting if I did that anyway

[DangerDolphin]

The temporary bonuses will just be removed if you try to equip something enchanted for a higher level character.

As Nau says, this would essentially only come up when someone was trying to get around the system.

[AstralUniverse]

The temporary bonuses will just be removed if you try to equip something enchanted for a higher level character.

Perfect.

[Flower Power]

Again, I have to ask, since there was no response before: if having +5 Weapons is not part of Arelith's encounter design, why do we have spawns casting Premonition and then spamming dispels and debuffs in low-to-midrange dungeons - dungeons that you will now be clearing well before you can ever acquire a +5 GMW'd weapon for counterplay (looking at you CON-debuffing Gobbo Shaman, and ubiquitous Malarite High Priests.)

I don't think there's a disconnect between any of the other statements that've been made, but there is a disconnect between saying "Arelith's lower end content is not balanced around the possession of +5 Weapons" and the reality that, yes, there are several places where Arelith's lower end content very much was balanced around the ability to have a +5 weapon for counterplay. Dungeons that've gone from "This is an all right place to go if you're prepared for it" to "This place is now a tooth-gnashing nightmare that is completely not worth visiting because by the time you're capable of providing counterplay to the mechanics the XP has ceased to be worth the investment."

[Xerah]

There are a lot of games where a Boss is made more powerful due to players being vastly better than creature AI.