What should a guild have for it's type?

[Mim]

Hehe.

It seems that reading the forum I should GAIN % of XP instead of paying % of the XP I gain, by beeing a Minstrel.

One thing that struck me when reading all the posts is the drawback issue.
Some guilds have drawbacks that should 'balance' some of their powers.

If lets say a mage have some strong spells for his combat, but they only work if the mage do not wear heavy armour.
I assume this sounds reasonable to everyone.
But if there are robes and cloaks that give the same AC and protection as a heavy platemail, then the drawback is no more effective.
If a guild have build in drawbacks, and there are coded workarounds of the same drawback, the system is broken.

Frankly I have no idea or knowledge about drawbacks in the guilds that are discussed here.
Or if they do have them, and if there are countermeasures to said drabacks, it is no good.

If spells do need components, let's say a very rare herb, that is hard to find, and is very limited in numbers, even if you know were to look, the system works fine.
But if the herb suddenly is found 'everywhere' in the realms it does not.
I do know there have been such issues in the past and there were easy ways to counter the drawbacks, which is perhaps not a good thing.

As I said, my knowledge is very limited (close to zero) in this case so I simply assume all is fine until proven not.

[Nerull]

Kvator, it appears to me that you think "switching" stance is somehow an advantage over a guild that immediately balances the power of the spell based on the criterias of what spells are active?

The forced switching is inferior to any guild that autobalances because the switch requires you to sacrifice all your ongoing effects.

It's a forced penalty, not a boon.

Poor Warlocks then!

Being able to match BM's on offence (for some guilds and weapons prolly even beat it) and then Pirates (with some healing as bonus) on defence. Such a penalty! Poor fellas they are

I'm just happy to clarify for you that the stances in the guild don't present a guild advantage, but a penalty. The first iteration of Warlocks had autobalancing spells which would make it more versatile and potentially stronger than it is today.

The latter argument of yours, if true, would also include all the rest of the layman caster options. Warlocks are not the strongest lay caster in either of the categories you now mentioned, which is worth to contemplate about.

[Kvator]

The latter argument of yours, if true, would also include all the rest of the layman caster options. Warlocks are not the strongest lay caster in either of the categories you now mentioned, which is worth to contemplate about.

The latter argument of mine apply only to Warlocks and EW - after whom Warlocks were copy-pasted* (just as I mentioned before).

Oots - doesn't boost offence almost at all (unless their last spell - that noone got yet - is something turbo-mega-wtf-op....like 4-levels of speed for example )

Heralds - doen't boost defence as good as Warlocks/EW (not even close actually). There are three reasons for that:
1 - Goblins and dwarves (and none of their subraces) can't join this guild. Defensive spells work best if you have high hp pool - not the case here.
2 - No tank-related stat boosters
3 - All their spells have number of silly limitations for some strange reason

Minstrels -

So no - you are not correct here. Maybe when you look at pure numbers within the code it looks fine, but if this 'balance document' doesn't take a number of critical factors (what races/guilds are allowed, what are the limits on spell-usage etc) into consideration - then it means it's flawed. Big time.

* copy-pasted in terms of core spell-set and mechanics (no limits whatsoever)

[Nerull]

The latter argument of yours, if true, would also include all the rest of the layman caster options. Warlocks are not the strongest lay caster in either of the categories you now mentioned, which is worth to contemplate about.

The latter argument of mine apply only to Warlocks and EW - after whom Warlocks were copy-pasted* (just as I mentioned before).

Oots - doesn't boost offence almost at all (unless their last spell - that noone got yet - is something turbo-mega-wtf-op....like 4-levels of speed for example )

Heralds - doen't boost defence as good as Warlocks/EW (not even close actually). There are three reasons for that:
1 - Goblins and dwarves (and none of their subraces) can't join this guild. Defensive spells work best if you have high hp pool - not the case here.
2 - No tank-related stat boosters
3 - All their spells have number of silly limitations for some strange reason

Minstrels -

So no - you are not correct here. Maybe when you look at pure numbers within the code it looks fine, but if this 'balance document' doesn't take a number of critical factors (what races/guilds are allowed, what are the limits on spell-usage etc) into consideration - then it means it's flawed. Big time.

* copy-pasted in terms of core spell-set and mechanics (no limits whatsoever)

Let me see if I understand your position correctly: Because Warlocks and EW don't have any obvious limitations in their current version of spells, you wish them to be either more limited, or/and in addition nerfed? And what percentage do you suggest?

[Kvator]

The latter argument of yours, if true, would also include all the rest of the layman caster options. Warlocks are not the strongest lay caster in either of the categories you now mentioned, which is worth to contemplate about.

The latter argument of mine apply only to Warlocks and EW - after whom Warlocks were copy-pasted* (just as I mentioned before).

Oots - doesn't boost offence almost at all (unless their last spell - that noone got yet - is something turbo-mega-wtf-op....like 4-levels of speed for example )

Heralds - doen't boost defence as good as Warlocks/EW (not even close actually). There are three reasons for that:
1 - Goblins and dwarves (and none of their subraces) can't join this guild. Defensive spells work best if you have high hp pool - not the case here.
2 - No tank-related stat boosters
3 - All their spells have number of silly limitations for some strange reason

Minstrels -

So no - you are not correct here. Maybe when you look at pure numbers within the code it looks fine, but if this 'balance document' doesn't take a number of critical factors (what races/guilds are allowed, what are the limits on spell-usage etc) into consideration - then it means it's flawed. Big time.

* copy-pasted in terms of core spell-set and mechanics (no limits whatsoever)

Let me see if I understand your position correctly: Because Warlocks and EW don't have any obvious limitations in their current version of spells, you wish them to be either more limited, or/and in addition nerfed? And what percentage do you suggest?

I guess that significant reduction in speed gain (2 full levels - equivalent of 2/3 speed items seems 'fair') should be a good start. Then maybe heal removal should be also considered - but speed is definately the biggest issue right now (1 layman spell giving more than full set of speed items seems bit irrational for me).

Personally I don't like the idea of baby-eaters / baby-killers being 'neutral', but on the other hand I don't like align system even more I don't like restrictions as well - I think players should be able to use what their got as often as possible (and therefore I would prefer nerfing of what they got instead od adding some crazy limitation systems - like the one Heralds got).

Ohh - another thing - imho success of layman spells should rely heavily on mental stats - ogres being able to use Warlocks/EW to (almost) full extend - due to the fact that almost all core spells are 'maintained' is a bit silly. It could also nerf the current fotm combo (Goblin+fighter occ+ EW/Warlock lay) a bit.

[Draugor]

Personally I don't like the idea of baby-eaters / baby-killers being 'neutral', but on the other hand I don't like align system even more I don't like restrictions as well - I think players should be able to use what their got as often as possible (and therefore I would prefer nerfing of what they got instead od adding some crazy limitation systems - like the one Heralds got).

Uhm... they arent neutral per se, eat a kid and it will NUKE your align alot to the point that you will be evil always Its only once the rituals are all done that there is any meaning whatsoever to try aligning towards good, a decent limit might be that you need to perform the ritual once per day to retain your powers and just keep killing your align.

And what Heralds have atm should never be implemented anywhere, ever. Adding stuff just to screw with people is stupid.

[Nerull]

For this to work, a global nerf on speed must be applied. This means all guilds (yes, occ and laymans) with that kind of spell must take a considerable hit, in percentage relative to their defined power. I predict that if this was done, the majority of players being unhappy about this would not be in the Warlocks...

Warlocks healspell isn't going away as it's the only healspell accessible on laymanlevel for evils in the game, while the goodies have access to many. Balance parity is important in this regard, and I'm sure you can agree on that.

[Draugor]

Ohh - another thing - imho success of layman spells should rely heavily on mental stats - ogres being able to use Warlocks/EW to (almost) full extend - due to the fact that almost all core spells are 'maintained' is a bit silly. It could also nerf the current fotm combo (Goblin+fighter occ+ EW/Warlock lay) a bit.

Race is and should not be a factor in balance In that case we'd have to take a look at how dodge works due to heavy dex races for instance. Spells are already effected by intelligence

[Kvator]

Ohh - another thing - imho success of layman spells should rely heavily on mental stats - ogres being able to use Warlocks/EW to (almost) full extend - due to the fact that almost all core spells are 'maintained' is a bit silly. It could also nerf the current fotm combo (Goblin+fighter occ+ EW/Warlock lay) a bit.

Race is and should not be a factor in balance In that case we'd have to take a look at how dodge works due to heavy dex races for instance. Spells are already effected by intelligence

Am I sayig race? Noone prevent you from focusing on mentals as a goblin.

You forgot to mention lot of specials heavily affected by strength in your 'list'. Spells are affected by intelligence? Maintained ones?

[Amberlee]

While the racial imbalance should be looked at, it has nothing to do with how to balance guilds.
If you balance a melee guild to goblins, you will effectively invalidate everything else as an option.
Same if you balance a caster guild to elf.