Well PoT but since we've really only got them we're kinda limited aside from warlocks healJohnny wrote:Don't we have evil healers so teams can have a composition of tank/dps/healer? Or is the evil healer just garbage?
Impending changes to 'quietstone' imbues
Forum rules
- Use common sense and be respectful towards each other at all times, even when disagreeing.
- Do not reveal sensitive game information. Guild secrets, player seconds are examples of things not allowed.
- Use common sense and be respectful towards each other at all times, even when disagreeing.
- Do not reveal sensitive game information. Guild secrets, player seconds are examples of things not allowed.
Re: Impending changes to 'quietstone' imbues
Re: Impending changes to 'quietstone' imbues
I can't image a layman heal doing the job effectively. Sounds like PoTs need to open up their doors for new alter boys and girls.Draugor wrote:Well PoT but since we've really only got them we're kinda limited aside from warlocks healJohnny wrote:Don't we have evil healers so teams can have a composition of tank/dps/healer? Or is the evil healer just garbage?
Re: Impending changes to 'quietstone' imbues
Well it's not OOTS strength, not even EW heal but.,.. I can spamJohnny wrote:I can't image a layman heal doing the job effectively. Sounds like PoTs need to open up their doors for new alter boys and girls.Draugor wrote:Well PoT but since we've really only got them we're kinda limited aside from warlocks healJohnny wrote:Don't we have evil healers so teams can have a composition of tank/dps/healer? Or is the evil healer just garbage?
Re: Impending changes to 'quietstone' imbues
Sorry missed this part of your post. Valid point... probably something we'd consider if we did a global review of sneak/hide.Rincon wrote:Should rogues be able to sneak, hide and backstab just as effectively while wearing heavy armours?
Re: Impending changes to 'quietstone' imbues
All valid points, and if we were to make global changes these things would need to be considered.Dhez wrote:Interesting idea. I'm curious about how it'd apply to every guild, though: would there be an armour penalty only for pure casters such sorcerers, clerics and mages since they're thematically robe wearing spellweavers, or would it also be a topic for non-fighter class guilds such as thieves, rangers, etc? Mechanically monks are fighters, but thematically a fully plate armoured monk wearing two shields and doing karate is funny. Same with fully armoured sneaking thieves and rangers.Arman wrote:The magic system is shared. Plate-wearing Paladins and clerics use the same system as robe wearing sorcerers. Armour could be introduced as a penalising factor (it already is with shields), and we have a better understanding of the benefit of armour as caid, but this sort of change isn't currently something on the cards. Plenty of other stuff that needs fixing first.
On a non-global scale, these considerations can be made in the coding or re-coding of guilds. For the elven archers recode, as a ranger-type they won't be able to wear platemail. Ckrik is considering a range of ways to make the Dragon Order playable while promoting a more traditional lightly armoured fighter.
http://tworzymyatmosfere.pl/przescieradla-jedwabne-z-gumka/