Is Lull not classic?

[Selene]

I heard that Lull is not classic (not enough critical resists) and may be nerfed on P99. I currently play a pally and lull is such a huge part of my dungeon crawling life. I imagine it would affect enchanters and clerics big time too. I do remember lull on original EQ being way less reliable, but then again I had no idea what I was doing back then and might’ve tried to lull even and yellow cons too much.

Anyone know if lull will be nerfed? Might focus more on another class instead of investing so much into my pally then

[Snaggles]

Lull is just one of many tricks. Even if they nerf it to death it will still be useful with a bit of planning. Or just grind in places you don’t need to take any risks (solo pulls or easy resets).

I put my 230CHA set in the bank due to never getting used. In a couple hours pulling seb in ABC at level 60, I had only a few crit resists. Of which, DA and a little group work sorted out the 3+5 frogs easily.

[Goregasmic]

Here for more info:

https://project1999.com/forums/showthread.php?t=328802&page=5

TL;DR lulls should have unique resist modifiers that are not yet implemented but should come eventually. This will make things more difficult 50+

My personal theory is people in classic remember failing lull a lot because they were trying to lull ~even cons with starter charisma. My research also found that people barely cared about charisma back then. My naked brand new ench on p99 in 2024 was getting like 25% crit lull fails on steamfont kobolds which tracks but if they're saying they found a resist layer they haven't put in we'll see.

What sucks is chanters and necros have ways around this (reverse charming or resetting fights) but pallies/clerics/bards, not so much.

[sajbert]

Who knows if it'll ever be implemented or not. There is no roadmap, little to no communication and developments are sporadic if not scarce

That's precisely why I understand your fear. It's a big commitment leveling up a character and, to me at least, the dull toolkit is what makes the Paladin interesting.

Given this possible upcoming change and not knowing what it may result in, I'd rather level an SK over a Paladin.

[spoil]

My personal theory is people in classic remember failing lull a lot because they were trying to lull ~even cons with starter charisma. My research also found that people barely cared about charisma back then. My naked brand new ench on p99 in 2024 was getting like 25% crit lull fails on steamfont kobolds which tracks but if they're saying they found a resist layer they haven't put in we'll see.


Yeah, lull already seems to work as they've described. Character level vs. mob level makes a massive difference. On a 60 enchanter the difference between lulling a high-40s and a low-50s mob is like night and day.

I think most people are reminiscing about the difficulty they had trying to split near even cons in exp groups on their dwarf pally, not a CHA-capped level 60.

[Goregasmic]

Yeah, lull already seems to work as they've described. Character level vs. mob level makes a massive difference. On a 60 enchanter the difference between lulling a high-40s and a low-50s mob is like night and day.

I think most people are reminiscing about the difficulty they had trying to split near even cons in exp groups on their dwarf pally, not a CHA-capped level 60.

Yeah, no shit lull hardly fails in places like HS basement or KC, by the time you reach that point you're late 50s killing 42-46 mobs on the verge of greening out. They also don't resist anything else either (nukes, charm, root).Try lulling krups+ and it is a resist fest. I remember doing froglok king in Lguk at 56 and I could pull him with crit fail lull reliably without stripping down. I've also done the naked disco corpse run a couple times and it was nerve wracking because lull clearly didn't work as well with 165ish cha. Made me strongly consider banking a CR cha set.

But like I said, in the other thread I researched staple enchanter items on allakhazam and looked at the pre 2002 comments and it is pretty clear people have a vague idea that ench needs cha but they don't know how much and why. If you don't know lull heavily leans on cha and level difference, you're going to have a bad time.

[Zuranthium]

My personal theory is people in classic remember failing lull a lot because they were trying to lull ~even cons with starter charisma.

We have the coding data for how Lull worked in classic. It was inconsistent at best and got relatively worse as you went up in level, regardless of Charisma. We also have in-era parses from players who had very high Charisma and were casting on much lower level MOBs.

Everquest emulators and TLP's have been far removed from Classic EQ the whole time, and this subject has been one of the biggest tells of who actually played Classic EQ and who didn't. Or at least who was paying attention back then.

One of my funniest memories from classic was my friend's sister storming out of her room, semi-raging about how her Enchanter couldn't lull a camp of things that were nearly green con, while a Ranger 10 levels below her had no problem lulling those things with harmony.

[PatChapp]

We have the coding data for how Lull worked in classic. It was inconsistent at best and got relatively worse as you went up in level, regardless of Charisma. We also have in-era parses from players who had very high Charisma and were casting on much lower level MOBs.

Everquest emulators and TLP's have been far removed from Classic EQ the whole time, and this subject has been one of the biggest tells of who actually played Classic EQ and who didn't. Or at least who was paying attention back then.

One of my funniest memories from classic was my friend's sister storming out of her room, semi-raging about how her Enchanter couldn't lull a camp of things that were nearly green con, while a Ranger 10 levels below her had no problem lulling those things with harmony.

Can you post those parses? Very curious just how different it is here,never played a lull class in classic.
I leveled a sk to 49 prekunark and didn't know about any exp penalty,i thought my friends were just playing more than me since they leveled a lot faster.

[Endorra]

Nowadays I only play enchanter for the lulls.

[Duik]

Had a static 6 person with a chanter who never charmed. He prioritized cha for CC only visited the chanter forums a lil bit to get a good idea for stat/equipment selection.

From just before Kunark dropping but we werent powerlevelers more adventurers/reliving the D and D of our youth. We lived in guk karnors and kaesora (eventually) hole and kedge.
Peeps did know early on that cha made lulls better, we were not uber guilded or leet players.
I remember being unsure if cha made a difference in mez/memblur success.

[Keebz]

Peeps did know early on that cha made lulls better, we were not uber guilded or leet players.
I remember being unsure if cha made a difference in mez/memblur success.

This is patently false. Many people here were children back then and like to project, but they were the exception in the rather large player base. We're talking hundreds of thousands of computer savvy adults—IT professionals and lifelong gamers mainly. Orders of magnitude more than who play here. It's absurd to think no one could possibly figure out the basic function of stats.

There's plenty of evidence of people running experiments for things like CHA effectiveness for mez, etc and we've lost a ton of data over the years to link rot.

Lull was so clearly terrible that documenting exactly how terrible it was was not a particularly useful endeavor. There's a reason the devs fixed it.

[Goregasmic]

Had a static 6 person with a chanter who never charmed. He prioritized cha for CC only visited the chanter forums a lil bit to get a good idea for stat/equipment selection.

From just before Kunark dropping but we werent powerlevelers more adventurers/reliving the D and D of our youth. We lived in guk karnors and kaesora (eventually) hole and kedge.
Peeps did know early on that cha made lulls better, we were not uber guilded or leet players.
I remember being unsure if cha made a difference in mez/memblur success.

I started from scratch on p99 with my chanter.

I had around 190 cha at level 45, doing CS wyverns to 51. At that point I was basically getting no resists anymore on root/stun/mez/charm/nukes. I do tash everything though. Then I moved to HS early 50s, velks mid 50s (when I finally capped cha) and seb late 50s and I only started seeing resists again on 51+ mobs but it was a significant increase.

Resist wise lull is its own thing. The charisma resist modifier on this eqemu page says it applies to charm, mez and memblur.

https://www.eqemulator.org/forums/showpost.php?p=270611&postcount=9

My experience shows me mez and charm have a similar resist behavior but memblur is tricky because it always lands but doesn't always work so it is hard to guesstimate unless you test it extensively.

Recently there was a charisma effect on charm thread and IIRC he found that at 50+ charisma started to move the needle. I'd guess level gap and tash at 60 will dull mob resists beyond charisma being useful but at 51+ mobs level gap narrows and their MR goes up so those two factors will leave some room for cha to do something. I'd assume it does the same for mez/blur.

[Goregasmic]

There's plenty of evidence of people running experiments for things like CHA effectiveness for mez, etc and we've lost a ton of data over the years to link rot.

Maybe some people tested on obscure boards but the knowledge base back then was fucking terrible in the general playerbase to stay polite. Most people didn't know how dual wield works and didn't know about bonus damage formulas. Almost every single monk was running a wu stick and a KD or canes of the tranquil long into velious+ vs. today where those are considered junk. I'd argue the general knowledge base is much much better today which makes sense because the game is 25 years old.

In the pacify bug thread I snapped appropriate comments from the relevant era and most people knew ench/bard needed cha but it seemed really unclear why and how much they needed it. Seemed like a secondary stat if not an afterthought for them. I don't think you can claim those mechanics were well known, we're still discovering stuff and debunking myths to this day. I'm not saying everyone was dumb, the warrior boards did some fine work but it wasn't the majority of players, there were a ton of casuals back then who couldn't be bothered beyond the basics.

[Jimjam]

I think a part of the gear issue people were facing is that weapons were far rarer on live, which necessitated 'poor' options - the decent stuff just didn't drop and wasn't affordable to buy. Check price history on Allakhazam!

[Goregasmic]

I think a part of the gear issue people were facing is that weapons were far rarer on live, which necessitated 'poor' options - the decent stuff just didn't drop and wasn't affordable to buy. Check price history on Allakhazam!

I had an IFS I remember buying for 7k, not too crazy but that was late velious I think.

There was a fashion effect though, the velium brawl sticks were very in vogue even if they're subpar to IFS and you had a ton of wurmslayers even though it is mostly known to be garbage now. I think the market was just different because people didn't know some basic stuff but also because there were items that were lesser known. The raiding guilds weren't as advanced either so there was possibly more pressure on the market I'd guess.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

I had an IFS I remember buying for 7k, not too crazy but that was late velious I think.

There was a fashion effect though, the velium brawl sticks were very in vogue even if they're subpar to IFS and you had a ton of wurmslayers even though it is mostly known to be garbage now. I think the market was just different because people didn't know some basic stuff but also because there were items that were lesser known. The raiding guilds weren't as advanced either so there was possibly more pressure on the market I'd guess.

Fashion was certainly a factor. During Kunark on live someone offered to trade me a Cloak of Flames for my Wurmslayer. 56k died before I got to do the trade, but people put a lot of stake into fashionquest on live. Especially unique graphics.

[Duik]

This is patently false. Many people here were children back then and like to project, but they were the exception in the rather large player base. We're talking hundreds of thousands of computer savvy adults—IT professionals and lifelong gamers mainly. Orders of magnitude more than who play here. It's absurd to think no one could possibly figure out the basic function of stats.

There's plenty of evidence of people running experiments for things like CHA effectiveness for mez, etc and we've lost a ton of data over the years to link rot.

Lull was so clearly terrible that documenting exactly how terrible it was was not a particularly useful endeavor. There's a reason the devs fixed it.

Well ok then mr i know everything aboit everyone.

I just told you my experience. I was defo not a child in 2000 as i was halfway through buying a house. Took me 7 years btw.

Also, while I didnt personally know how chanters and cha worked (I was a wizard) our chanter did quite well at the crowd control job he had. So basically, you can get fucked.

Your totally dismissive attitude tells me that you still are a child and therefore need to shut the hell up till spoken to specifically.

Thank you for your attention at this time.

[kjs86z2]

I had an IFS I remember buying for 7k, not too crazy but that was late velious I think.

There was a fashion effect though, the velium brawl sticks were very in vogue even if they're subpar to IFS and you had a ton of wurmslayers even though it is mostly known to be garbage now. I think the market was just different because people didn't know some basic stuff but also because there were items that were lesser known. The raiding guilds weren't as advanced either so there was possibly more pressure on the market I'd guess.

I accidentally (drunkenly?) swapped to my OT hammer instead of Facesmasher before and disappeared on a group.

[Duik]

You didnt like the dps of the facesmasher? People are sooo picky. ;+P

Also keebz will say children back in the day didnt know a facesmasher was better than an OT hammer. They just didnt understand.

[kjs86z2]

same graphic op

[Jimjam]

same graphic op

When slow takes ages to proc, but then “Loading, please wait…” whoops that wasn’t trunch.

[WarpathEQ]

I accidentally (drunkenly?) swapped to my OT hammer instead of Facesmasher before and disappeared on a group.

Lol I remember awhile back our main tank did this in HoT, first pull, and of course he got a first swing proc. We weren't ToV bound back then either....