Genesis Forums

Nerull is being a little disingenuous.

The catalyst for coding the Warlocks was because the Necromancers didn't conform to the standardised magic system and had to be closed. Rather than re-coding the necromancers and have a confusing overlap with Gorboth's future necromancer project, it was decided to be thematically recreated. And I think Nerull did a great job at adding a beautiful Lovecraftian guild to the game!

But the number of evil layman options never changed. The necromancers can no longer be joined, and they will be closed within a fortnight. The number of _viable_ layman options for evil characters? Well that has changed.

Ultimately layman options is something we want to continue to expand for all guild and alignment types. That is what adds versatility to occupational choice.

Arman wrote:Nerull is being a little disingenuous.

The catalyst for coding the Warlocks was because the Necromancers didn't conform to the standardised magic system and had to be closed. Rather than re-coding the necromancers and have a confusing overlap with Gorboth's future necromancer project, it was decided to be thematically recreated. And I think Nerull did a great job at adding a beautiful Lovecraftian guild to the game!

But the number of evil layman options never changed. The necromancers can no longer be joined, and they will be closed within a fortnight. The number of _viable_ layman options for evil characters? Well that has changed.

Ultimately layman options is something we want to continue to expand for all guild and alignment types. That is what adds versatility to occupational choice.

I mean realistically you don't need to add a bunch of new guilds. Don't get me wrong, far as laymans go if a wizard wants to code one I fully support it, more options are always great to have. In my mind what can really make the world of difference is removing a lot of these weapon locked guilds. Blademasters for example can become Weaponmasters the celts of which the lore is loosely based off of weren't a bunch of sword wielding guru's. They did use other weapons as did Militia's, Angmars Armies and even the Elves of Qualinesti weren't restricted to bows only.

Weapon locking guilds may have made sense back in the 90's when the machines couldn't handle as much data and items needed to be spread out and regulated but these days I just don't personally see the need to continue the trend. If a Gladiator wants to wield a sword... let them choose a sword. I mean I hate to say it but only good aligned/neutral guilds seem to get this small form of versatility which can actually be a very nice feature. I mean I don't remember anywhere in the lore it saying that Red Dragonarmy members could only use Polearms in fact they were some of the best paid and best equipped of the five armies. I don't think they limited themselves to one weapon type.

I dunno, I mean can anyone give a reason as to why we even need weapon locked guilds in this day and age? I'm not suggesting that we just let every single guild raise all weapon types to their respective guild maxes at once, but would it really be that bad of an idea to give guilds the ability to choose a weapon of choice like the Knights/Calians/Rangers or Neidars get to? By removing such limitations you do open a few more doors for viable guild choices.

Necromancers was doomed to closure, which would give zero options for the general evil population of the game. While unaware of the OotS at the time, I knew Heralds would have an upgrade sooner or later, and EW was not a good option for most evil guilds.

So I don't think I'm disingenious when I say I bothered coding the warlocks for game balancing purposes - that is the actual core reason why I spent my time doing it.

Nerull wrote:Necromancers was doomed to closure, which would give zero options for the general evil population of the game. While unaware of the OotS at the time, I knew Heralds would have an upgrade sooner or later, and EW was not a good option for most evil guilds.

So I don't think I'm disingenious when I say I bothered coding the warlocks for game balancing purposes - that is the actual core reason why I spent my time doing it.

1. BMs (superb option for BDAs and evil mercs/SUs), Minotaurs (top notch guild that fits all pure evil OCCs), Pirates (pretty nice option for solo-playing DAs or turbo-tank mode for AAs), AA (one od the best laymans and evil only!), Thieves (evil only!), Templars (evil only!), Monks ( ), Minstrels (magic using layman!), Tricksters ( ) and finally EW (it's important to say tha they're not ALIGN EXCLUSIVE - they're more like 'you are not my ooc friend'-exclusive. There is a bunch of goodies that won't be able to join it just because the leader of some other guild don't like them ). Definately not ZERO options in my book.

2 - Then why you didn't bless the evils with some kind of Heralds equivalent (that are actually goodie only!) ?
Not because whines about EW? (and I am not saying that in general whines about EW were unjustified - esp after speed levels were revealed)

Kvator wrote:

Nerull wrote:Necromancers was doomed to closure, which would give zero options for the general evil population of the game. While unaware of the OotS at the time, I knew Heralds would have an upgrade sooner or later, and EW was not a good option for most evil guilds.

So I don't think I'm disingenious when I say I bothered coding the warlocks for game balancing purposes - that is the actual core reason why I spent my time doing it.

1. BMs (superb option for BDAs and evil mercs/SUs), Minotaurs (top notch guild that fits all pure evil OCCs), Pirates (pretty nice option for solo-playing DAs or turbo-tank mode for AAs), AA (one od the best laymans and evil only!), Thieves (evil only!), Templars (evil only!), Monks ( ), Minstrels (magic using layman!), Tricksters ( ) and finally EW (it's important to say tha they're not ALIGN EXCLUSIVE - they're more like 'you are not my ooc friend'-exclusive. There is a bunch of goodies that won't be able to join it just because the leader of some other guild don't like them ). Definately not ZERO options in my book.

2 - Then why you didn't bless the evils with some kind of Heralds equivalent (that are actually goodie only!) ?
Not because whines about EW? (and I am not saying that in general whines about EW were unjustified - esp after speed levels were revealed)

Maybe I should've mentioned _caster_-options here as I assumed it was obvious. Not sure if minstrels count as casters, and, when or if they will be recoded.

Herald equivalent? You refer to the alignment, or power?

Nerull wrote: Maybe I should've mentioned _caster_-options here as I assumed it was obvious. Not sure if minstrels count as casters, and, when or if they will be recoded.

Herald equivalent? You refer to the alignment, or power?

Well at the moment you started your work there were 2 neutral options (minstrels, EW) + 1 goodie and 1 evil options (with necros being way more viable).

Equivalent in power ofc (who cares bout lore/RP nowadays)

Kvator wrote:

Nerull wrote: Maybe I should've mentioned _caster_-options here as I assumed it was obvious. Not sure if minstrels count as casters, and, when or if they will be recoded.

Herald equivalent? You refer to the alignment, or power?

Well at the moment you started your work there were 2 neutral options (minstrels, EW) + 1 goodie and 1 evil options (with necros being way more viable).

Equivalent in power ofc (who cares bout lore/RP nowadays)

But I did bless the evils with some kind of "Herald equivalent", from a power perspective.

Different thematics, design, and spell makeup for sure, but not more powerful. There are limits of how potent a layman can be, and to my knowledge, no layman crosses that barrier (of the recoded guilds).

Nerull wrote:

Kvator wrote:

Nerull wrote: Maybe I should've mentioned _caster_-options here as I assumed it was obvious. Not sure if minstrels count as casters, and, when or if they will be recoded.

Herald equivalent? You refer to the alignment, or power?

Well at the moment you started your work there were 2 neutral options (minstrels, EW) + 1 goodie and 1 evil options (with necros being way more viable).

Equivalent in power ofc (who cares bout lore/RP nowadays)

But I did bless the evils with some kind of "Herald equivalent", from a power perspective.

Different thematics, design, and spell makeup for sure, but not more powerful. There are limits of how potent a layman can be, and to my knowledge, no layman crosses that barrier (of the recoded guilds).

There are other ways to quantify power. Does the Warlock guild punish you for using your spells? Or punish you for being in an area for too long? The heralds do. Does the Warlock guild punish you for using spells on the wrong people? Heralds do. Does one of the most useful warlock spells break just because you dismount your horse? Heralds do.

Warlocks > Heralds when it comes to power simply because of the way herald spells function.

Kvator wrote:

Nerull wrote:Necromancers was doomed to closure, which would give zero options for the general evil population of the game. While unaware of the OotS at the time, I knew Heralds would have an upgrade sooner or later, and EW was not a good option for most evil guilds.

So I don't think I'm disingenious when I say I bothered coding the warlocks for game balancing purposes - that is the actual core reason why I spent my time doing it.

1. BMs (superb option for BDAs and evil mercs/SUs), Minotaurs (top notch guild that fits all pure evil OCCs), Pirates (pretty nice option for solo-playing DAs or turbo-tank mode for AAs), AA (one od the best laymans and evil only!), Thieves (evil only!), Templars (evil only!), Monks ( ), Minstrels (magic using layman!), Tricksters ( ) and finally EW (it's important to say tha they're not ALIGN EXCLUSIVE - they're more like 'you are not my ooc friend'-exclusive. There is a bunch of goodies that won't be able to join it just because the leader of some other guild don't like them ). Definately not ZERO options in my book.

2 - Then why you didn't bless the evils with some kind of Heralds equivalent (that are actually goodie only!) ?
Not because whines about EW? (and I am not saying that in general whines about EW were unjustified - esp after speed levels were revealed)

Blademasters and minos are 100% neutral. Calians also have no problems with minos, seen a few of em in there Pirates are neutral aswell alignwise, neidar for instance accept them for guildreference. THieves can be good but they get a cut in skills unless that thanged during the recode. So you're very much wrong on quite a few of the "evil" ones

Ody wrote:
There are other ways to quantify power. Does the Warlock guild punish you for using your spells? Or punish you for being in an area for too long? The heralds do. Does the Warlock guild punish you for using spells on the wrong people? Heralds do. Does one of the most useful warlock spells break just because you dismount your horse? Heralds do.

Warlocks > Heralds when it comes to power simply because of the way herald spells function.

Warlocks where more a counter to EW and the old and corrupt system and quite heavy bias (telling someone flat out that they wont be allowed to join on any char kinda tells you alot, no not me ) there, it also counters heralds at the same time And Heraldspeed ONLY working when mounted... the hell are people smoking in the wizzranks? -.-