Forums » The Enchanter

Enchanter Charm Mechanics

    • 7 posts
    July 16, 2016 8:03 AM PDT

    Ondark said:

    I dont understand why a charmed mob should be weaker then a non charmed one. 

    It shouldn't - end of story. 

    • 75 posts
    July 16, 2016 1:48 PM PDT

    Agreed!  If we are going to have to deal with mob that is full strength and buffed upon break, we should get the full benefits while it is charmed.  

    • 75 posts
    July 16, 2016 1:48 PM PDT

    Agreed!  If we are going to have to deal with mob that is full strength and buffed upon break, we should get the full benefits while it is charmed.  

    • 16 posts
    April 25, 2017 1:18 PM PDT

    Bring back Dire Charm  =-P

    • 25 posts
    May 2, 2017 10:29 PM PDT

    Deadshade said:

    Jitai said:

      The most amazing aspect of the EQ Enchanter for me was that some people were very good enchanters and some people just weren't. 

     

    I respectfully but very strongly disagree.

    In EQ there were only good and very good enchanters.

    And it couldn't have been otherwise. By design there was no other class that was able to generate an immediate and horrible wipeout than an enchanter.

    The natural selection made it so that (potentially) bad enchanters died out LOOOOONG before 30 or so.

     

    This is also the reason why I have always considered that the EQ enchanter design was the best, the most differentiated and most realistic class design ever.

     

     

    I have to disagree with you on the part about there only being good or very good chanters. I saw some pretty terrible chanters. Chanter was my main class, but I did eventually make a nec, rng, bard, wiz, and a rog just to say I added variety, I never got serious with them bc chanting was my thing, and the rest was just boring to me. I only grouped with 1 or 2 chanters that weren't useless. If a chanter said, "we are just buff bots bc they nerfed us" I didn't want them in my group, and that was a common problem post-POP nerfs on xegony. it sucked, but tbh, (sigh) never thought i'd speak this out loud, but that nerf was needed. 2 decent chanters charming in drunder shouldn't be able to make a raid win or lose against RZ, but it did. After the Nerf i think it was something silly like, 3 decent chanters charming made the difference...seriously though, those buffed pets were literally twice the dps of the rest of the raid in same cases. it was just silly. instead of a blanket nerf, they could have just nerfed charm effects if the chanter was in a raid, but I guess the (knee) Jerks just did the quickest and easiest fix?

     

    Anyway, there were some terrible chanters out there, you must have just been really lucky or blessed to have so many good-very good ones on your server.

     

    *changed POT to drunder, realizing may be mistaken for PoTime instead of Tactics ;)


    This post was edited by Etahfo at May 2, 2017 11:54 PM PDT
    • 435 posts
    May 15, 2017 11:19 PM PDT

    Somthing that I have noticed in EQ99.. charmed mobs didnt use some skills in their repertoire when charmed, most importantly heals.  So whilst charmed they wouldnt heal themselves or others unless charm broke then they might heal them selves or other mobs if they are low.  In the newer version of EQ they have changed it so they mobs heal themselves and also group members when charmed.  I really love this feature!  Without this feature there is hardly any reason to charm an orc shaman because you get all the limitations of that class (being lower HP's / AC or whatever) but you dont get their primary ability!  I would really love Pantheon to include the full range of the mobs abilites (once charmed) and also the AI of those abilities to be used included with charming (healing at 50%, buffing itself when buffs run out or whatever it is)! I hope this is the case!

    Is there a good case against this? Is this me being too greedy? A pet that heals itself and also injured group members is extremely useful but is this.. too useful? ;)

     

    • 3 posts
    August 4, 2017 7:56 AM PDT
    One thing I haven't seen brought up. How big a role will stats like, for instance, CHARISMA!!! play? Started out in EQ it factored into charm and mezz checks, which made race a big deal. Some had high INT (mana) some had high CHR, but you had to go shopping and it mattered. What gear you took, it mattered. But I believe they took the racial differences out of it. Hey yo VR. I'm not here to play politics and media. I'm here for a fantasy. Stats should matter, races should be different, not everyone should be evenly good or bad at everything. You said as much with classes, what about this?
    • 60 posts
    August 4, 2017 12:01 PM PDT

    Hokanu said:

    Somthing that I have noticed in EQ99.. charmed mobs didnt use some skills in their repertoire when charmed, most importantly heals.  So whilst charmed they wouldnt heal themselves or others unless charm broke then they might heal them selves or other mobs if they are low.  In the newer version of EQ they have changed it so they mobs heal themselves and also group members when charmed.  I really love this feature!  Without this feature there is hardly any reason to charm an orc shaman because you get all the limitations of that class (being lower HP's / AC or whatever) but you dont get their primary ability!  I would really love Pantheon to include the full range of the mobs abilites (once charmed) and also the AI of those abilities to be used included with charming (healing at 50%, buffing itself when buffs run out or whatever it is)! I hope this is the case!

    Is there a good case against this? Is this me being too greedy? A pet that heals itself and also injured group members is extremely useful but is this.. too useful? ;)

     

     

    Charming in EQ was always dangerous. Charming a shaman class for instance... the shaman still hit like a truck. All mobs hit hard, and that's a good thing, it makes them a nice challenge.

    Charming in a group, however, was always a risk, have been in hundreds of groups where a charmed pet would also break at the worst time and kill the enchanter while it was trying to CC a bad pull. 

    So I think EQ charm was fine the way it was, it was a very high risk, high reward thing to do. Buffing it... was an insane risk, but the dmg output was also insane.

    Honestly, i think multiple charms should increase the length and lessen the chance of charm breaking. As horrible as it is, we get used to thing pretty quickly, and while killing someone we normally wouldn't would hurt us... after 5 hours of being forced to do it you get used to it and just accept it, or get numb to the whole idea... war in the real world has taught us that much.

    • 130 posts
    August 19, 2017 9:49 AM PDT

    You should be able to charm a mob and have it at full strength, if you buff it and it breaks, well, too bad, so sad. You've got a mini-boss to deal with. When a mob is charmed, you should have full use of its entire repetoire of skills/ spells.

    It should be difficult to charm intelligent humanoid mobs. Maybe being able to land a charm on a mob should be based off of a few different factors. Your charisma and intelligence and the mobs intelligence, will, and sv vs magic/ psionics. It shouldn't be too easy for you to charm up a healer and bring it along with you. it should be fighting your will the entire time. Maybe even have a charmed pet only spell called Mind Lash that you occasionally have to cast to keep your charmed mob under your control. I dont know if this should be represented with a "willpower" inticator, or just have to guess at it. That spell should cost a nice chunk of mana to use. Lesser willed creatures, you wouldn't have to Mind Lash so much.

    There should still be a random chance of your charm just breaking.

    Charmed mobs should retain their factions. if you run into an Elf city with a Skar mob charmed, they should attack it.

    You should be able to loot and place items on a charmed mob. If the mob is humanoid, it should use weapons and armor traded to it.

    Boss mobs should probably not be charmable, but if so, it should be hella difficult.

    That's all i can think of at the moment :)


    This post was edited by Keiiek at August 19, 2017 9:53 AM PDT