Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 61 to 76 of 76
  1. #61
    2014 DDO Players Council
    SirValentine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Korea (temporarily)
    Posts
    5,430

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EllisDee37 View Post
    In my opinion, the P&P version is irrelevant to DDO, and correcting the DDO version to prevent SLAs is consistent and justified.
    Consistent with what? If p&p is irrelevant, then it's not "consistent" with anything, it's just a random nerf: something that used to work won't anymore, for no particular reason.

    I don't see any over-arching game balance issue that requires nerfing. Do you? But I support making it more consistent with p&p rules.

    Random changes that are neither much-needed balancing nerfs nor fixes to long-standing inconsistencies with the base rules, are pointless. If me feeling that way is a tantrum, so be it.

  2. #62
    Community Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    2,671

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EllisDee37 View Post
    This is the impression I get as well. Certainly nobody will bother with them once sentient weapons are introduced, right? This area will very soon be a ghost-land to rival house cannith.
    This is why I said the new raid weapons should be level 25. With ETR and ITR, these weapons will get little use because of their ML. When the cap is raised to 30 and Sentient Weapons are added, these weapons will only be used as Dragon Beaters. So dropping the ML to 25, the weapons will fit comfortably between CITW weapons and the Sentient weapons when leveling, although it seems like many of the CITW or other named items still out class these new raid weapons anyway.

  3. #63
    Community Member PsychoBlonde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    1,494

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hathorian View Post
    Ok, if you are going to take it that that extreme then you have to nullify magic weapons, items and armor from functioning as well.
    Technically magical abilities (such as buffs) should merely be SUPPRESSED by antimagic, not DISPELLED. I don't really care all that much--beholders have gradually become a more moderate and easy-to-handle threat.
    I edited a book!

    Thelanis player: Arekkeh, Kimberlei (heroic completionist), Lehren (heroic/epic completionist), Natheme, Terpsikhore

  4. #64

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SirValentine View Post
    Consistent with what?
    Consistent with the way beholders have been implemented in DDO. Casting spells shouldn't work in their AMF, and SLAs should be included in that for consistency.

    If p&p is irrelevant, then it's not "consistent" with anything, it's just a random nerf: something that used to work won't anymore, for no particular reason.
    P&P is indeed irrelevant, and it's not a random nerf. Today's game has far more SLAs than there used to be, rendering the AMF pointless. I'll agree that this should have been changed when MotU was first released, which is when we got a bunch of new SLAs. (eg: energy burst.) The enhancement pass added a whole slew of new SLAs as well, so this change is long overdue to maintain consistency.

    I don't see any over-arching game balance issue that requires nerfing. Do you? But I support making it more consistent with p&p rules.

    Random changes that are neither much-needed balancing nerfs nor fixes to long-standing inconsistencies with the base rules, are pointless. If me feeling that way is a tantrum, so be it.
    I do see an issue that requires nerfing, yes. There are far too many SLAs in today's game to allow them to keep working in an antimagic field. I do not support making it consistent with P&P rules, which I view as wholly irrelevant. I do not see this nerf as random at all; as more and more SLAs have been introduced, this clearly bugged system is now being corrected.

  5. #65
    2014 DDO Players Council
    SirValentine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Korea (temporarily)
    Posts
    5,430

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EllisDee37 View Post
    I do see an issue that requires nerfing, yes.
    OK. Though I don't share the opinion that there's a balance issue big enough to prioritize developer time on, I can respect that your perspective differs. But even if I agreed it was dreadfully overpowered, that has nothing to do with "consistency".

    Quote Originally Posted by EllisDee37 View Post
    Consistent with the way beholders have been implemented in DDO. Casting spells shouldn't work in their AMF, and SLAs should be included in that for consistency.
    <snip>
    ...this change is long overdue to maintain consistency.
    You're contradicting yourself. The way beholders have been implemented in DDO is that SLAs in fact DO work in their anti-magic. So changing that is NOT consistent with how it's implemented in DDO.

    Quote Originally Posted by EllisDee37 View Post
    I do not support making it consistent with P&P rules, which I view as wholly irrelevant.
    <snip>
    ...this clearly bugged system is now being corrected.
    I also view it as bugged...but ONLY because it's inconsistent with p&p rules. But if one is treating those as irrelevant, then it just is what it is. In what sense is it then "clearly bugged"? That's not the same as "overpowered and in need of nerfing".

  6. #66
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    2

    Unhappy Re-downloading Lamannia

    My computer had to be fixed by HP and when I got it back everything was gone.I have the regular DDO now....but can't redownload Lamannia....is there a new way to re download it?Please help......

  7. #67

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SirValentine View Post
    You're contradicting yourself. The way beholders have been implemented in DDO is that SLAs in fact DO work in their anti-magic. So changing that is NOT consistent with how it's implemented in DDO.

    I also view it as bugged...but ONLY because it's inconsistent with p&p rules. But if one is treating those as irrelevant, then it just is what it is. In what sense is it then "clearly bugged"? That's not the same as "overpowered and in need of nerfing".
    I'm not contradicting myself when I say that anything that suppresses spells should also suppress SLAs for consistency.

    The original implementation that allowed SLAs to function was a mostly inconsequential bug because there were so few SLAs in the game. In today's game, with more SLAs than you can shake a stick at, they need to make SLAs suppressed by the same things that suppress spells for consistency as far as game mechanics.

    Consider a cleric. When facing a beholder, I can use my searing light SLA but I can't use my searing light spell? That's inconsistent and clearly bugged.

  8. #68
    Community Member Ebondevil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    413

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EllisDee37 View Post
    I'm not contradicting myself when I say that anything that suppresses spells should also suppress SLAs for consistency.

    The original implementation that allowed SLAs to function was a mostly inconsequential bug because there were so few SLAs in the game. In today's game, with more SLAs than you can shake a stick at, they need to make SLAs suppressed by the same things that suppress spells for consistency as far as game mechanics.

    Consider a cleric. When facing a beholder, I can use my searing light SLA but I can't use my searing light spell? That's inconsistent and clearly bugged.
    And if Buffs from spells are removed then buffs from magic equipment should also be removed, if they're not then it's also inconsistent and bugged.

    Obviously the equipment buffs should return when the Anti-Magic field is off, as should buffs from spells, or that too would be inconsistent.

    In Addition the Anti-Magic Field should prevent any magic from effecting the target, which includes the Beholders own rays.

  9. #69

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ebondevil View Post
    And if Buffs from spells are removed then buffs from magic equipment should also be removed, if they're not then it's also inconsistent and bugged.

    Obviously the equipment buffs should return when the Anti-Magic field is off, as should buffs from spells, or that too would be inconsistent.

    In Addition the Anti-Magic Field should prevent any magic from effecting the target, which includes the Beholders own rays.
    Item effects are similar to persistent spells, like ice storm, which are not dispelled by the AMF.

    Consider that beholders have two effects: an AMF, and a dispel. The AMF suppresses active casting of magic. SLAs are clearly magic, so should also be suppressed. The AMF doesn't do anything to your buffs.

    The dispel effect dispels your buffs, and is found all over the place, not just on beholders. Do we really want to be unable to use magical items in Demon Sands due to all the dispelling? Or tempest spine? Or any number of quests where enemy mobs dispel you?

  10. #70
    2015 DDO Players Council Seikojin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    gamertown usa
    Posts
    6,522

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EllisDee37 View Post
    Item effects are similar to persistent spells, like ice storm, which are not dispelled by the AMF.

    Consider that beholders have two effects: an AMF, and a dispel. The AMF suppresses active casting of magic. SLAs are clearly magic, so should also be suppressed. The AMF doesn't do anything to your buffs.

    The dispel effect dispels your buffs, and is found all over the place, not just on beholders. Do we really want to be unable to use magical items in Demon Sands due to all the dispelling? Or tempest spine? Or any number of quests where enemy mobs dispel you?
    I think it would be worth the challenge to have dispel and AMF suppress items and non-supernatural abilities. The new suppression didn't slow me down in slaughtering beholders.

  11. #71
    2015 DDO Players Council Seikojin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    gamertown usa
    Posts
    6,522

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Destiny_Katiana View Post
    My computer had to be fixed by HP and when I got it back everything was gone.I have the regular DDO now....but can't redownload Lamannia....is there a new way to re download it?Please help......
    They are changing the location to download the client. So you are kind of stuck for a bit.

  12. #72
    Community Member Ebondevil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    413

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EllisDee37 View Post
    Item effects are similar to persistent spells, like ice storm, which are not dispelled by the AMF.

    Consider that beholders have two effects: an AMF, and a dispel. The AMF suppresses active casting of magic. SLAs are clearly magic, so should also be suppressed. The AMF doesn't do anything to your buffs.

    The dispel effect dispels your buffs, and is found all over the place, not just on beholders. Do we really want to be unable to use magical items in Demon Sands due to all the dispelling? Or tempest spine? Or any number of quests where enemy mobs dispel you?
    Except they don't have two effects, they have one, an Anti Magic Cone, which is supposed to suppress ALL magic within the cone, not just Spell based buffs, the only things they shouldn't suppress are Conjuration (Creation spells) effects, which some spells bring into play, Cloudkill comes to mind, Ice Storm is not one of them though so should really be suppressed as well.

    Otherwise it should be called a Partial Anti-Magic Field or a Highly Selective Anti-Magic Field, which is basically what it currently is.

    I suspect the real problems are the following Engine Limitations though:
    They can't Temporarily Supress Area Effect spells, it's all or nothing, on or off.
    They can't Temporarily Supress Spell Buffs, again, all or nothing, on or off.

    As it is the current implementation makes it significantly more powerful against casters than it does against melee characters, this was somewhat mitigated by being able to use SLA's through the Anti Magic field, with the loss of that though, what little mitigation there was got pretty much defenestrated.

    I would also like to note I have had a problem with the way the Beholders Anti-Magic effect works, since long before U21.

    Not to mention Beholders Rays (at least in 3.5) all have Saves against them and they do not have an Enervate Ray to spam dozens of negative levels on a character in a matter of seconds.

    As far as I'm concerned Beholders need to be balanced to be equally effective against non casters and casters, then they need a smack with the Nerf stick, they didn't need to be selectively improved against casters.

  13. #73

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ebondevil View Post
    Except they don't have two effects, they have one, an Anti Magic Cone, which is supposed to suppress ALL magic within the cone, not just Spell based buffs, the only things they shouldn't suppress are Conjuration (Creation spells) effects, which some spells bring into play, Cloudkill comes to mind, Ice Storm is not one of them though so should really be suppressed as well.
    You are mistaken. It is clearly two different effects, a special beholder-only anti-magic field, and then a second dispel effect that works the same way as other mob dispelling does.

    This is easily verifiable with a repeatable experiment: Equip a pale lavendar ioun stone, or anything that absorbs spells, and stand in front of a beholder. Notice that the absorption absorbs the dispel effect, letting you keep your buffs. Also notice that you cannot cast spells. This is clearly and undeniably two different, unrelated effects. One is absorbed by a PLIS, the other is not.

    And to clarify about ice storm, you can't cast it inside an AMF just like you can't cast any spells. But it's a persistent effect, and the AMF doesn't do anything to those. (It doesn't do anything to your buffs, either; that's a dispel, not the AMF.) The example of ice storm was to run around a corner, outside of the AMF, and cast it. When the beholder follows you, the ice storm that you already cast isn't dispelled by the AMF. No persistant spells are. (Wall of fire, etc...)

    Quote Originally Posted by Ebondevil View Post
    As far as I'm concerned Beholders need to be balanced to be equally effective against non casters and casters, then they need a smack with the Nerf stick, they didn't need to be selectively improved against casters.
    I see no reason or justification for this, and I strongly disagree with the sentiment. It is right and proper that some mobs should be more difficult for casters, some more difficult for melee.

    In a similar way, should portals be made vulnerable to energy damage to help out casters? I would say no.

  14. #74
    Community Member Ebondevil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    413

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EllisDee37 View Post
    You are mistaken. It is clearly two different effects, a special beholder-only anti-magic field, and then a second dispel effect that works the same way as other mob dispelling does.

    This is easily verifiable with a repeatable experiment: Equip a pale lavendar ioun stone, or anything that absorbs spells, and stand in front of a beholder. Notice that the absorption absorbs the dispel effect, letting you keep your buffs. Also notice that you cannot cast spells. This is clearly and undeniably two different, unrelated effects. One is absorbed by a PLIS, the other is not.
    Just because something does work a certain way does not mean it should work that way, the whole point is, the current beholders are broken, if they are applying the Dispel effect, they shouldn't be, as it should suppress spells, not remove them.

    Secondly, it doesn't work like other mobs Dispel because it removed everything pretty much Guaranteed, I have never once seen it leave a spell buff unaffected if it removes some it removes all, whereas mob dispel effects remove buffs based on caster level checks, and rarely, if ever, remove them all in one go.

    One of the things I like about D&D is that the rules make sense, and are not arbitrary

    DDO is more and more turning more and more to the arbitrary seeming rules, and becoming less enjoyable as a result, if I wanted arbitrary rules there's lots of other games out there for that.

    Suffice to say I consider Beholders AMF currently broken, and even if All the Dev's currently working on the game tell me it's working as intended, I will still consider it broken, and I will just avoid any content which includes them because I find the current mechanics of them to be exceedingly frustrating.

  15. #75

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ebondevil View Post
    Secondly, it doesn't work like other mobs Dispel because it removed everything pretty much Guaranteed, I have never once seen it leave a spell buff unaffected if it removes some it removes all, whereas mob dispel effects remove buffs based on caster level checks, and rarely, if ever, remove them all in one go.
    I'll grant you that beholder caster level checks are through the roof on the dispel, but it's inarguable that spell absorption absorbs the dispel but does not absorb the antimagic field. The only reasonable conclusion is that they are two different, unrelated effects.

  16. #76
    Community Member Titan18's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    12

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EllisDee37 View Post
    I'll grant you that beholder caster level checks are through the roof on the dispel, but it's inarguable that spell absorption absorbs the dispel but does not absorb the antimagic field. The only reasonable conclusion is that they are two different, unrelated effects.
    Guy's Just buy the Anti - Beholder crystals in the store, they block everything. And dont buy just one get multiple of them.

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

This form's session has expired. You need to reload the page.

Reload