[bum3]

Originally Posted by Benanov [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

My point in my earlier post was to refocus the discussion not on high-end min/max content, but on garden-variety grouping content.

However, given this, I might consider changing my position:



The proper response to that is "it sucks to suck, doesn't it?" and to stop charming.

If they inquire further you can educate them upon their duties when charm breaks.

I've been in groups where both enchanters wanted to charm. That's not happening. I don't need both enchanters dealing with charm breaks at the same time - and I'm pretty sure that's the original definition of Murphy's Law.

"If there are exactly two ways to do something, and one of them results in catastrophic failure, then someone will do it that way."

--

Enchanter charm requires taking on certain risks for a massive boost in power. With a knowledgeable partner/group etc, those risks are massively reduced. Without those risk reductions, it's a hop skip and a jump to a TPW.

I think the design is fine as-is. Charm never tells you when it's going to break, and so as a result you are riding a bucking bronco. You're going to get thrown off, it's just a matter of when. Haste your pet or give it too many advantages, and those will come at you once charm breaks.

You seem like a reasonable person.