|
#1
|
|||
|
mage epic pet
shout be immune to charm + any type of banishment spells. also the pet should be harder to cc then it currently is
| ||
#2
|
||||
|
Quote:
__________________
Current Games:
Naw | |||
#3
|
|||
|
No I had bards charm and kill epic mage pets in Velks all the time
Ssok (bard) was notorious for shutting down Vamprea like this on RZ Now... it should definitely have higher magic resist than the other pets. A lot higher. | ||
#4
|
|||
|
Get this pet fixed please . So I can get re-immersed
| ||
#5
|
|||
|
nirgon is completely wrong, prove me otherwise
__________________
| ||
#6
|
|||
|
Mmmm I'm with you that it was faster than the average bear, it surely was even without Velocity. It would be nipping at your heals with jboots up, enough so that if you didn't get a sufficient bead running away from it for a while it'd definitely lay into you on a shadowstep/yonder attempt before you got it off
I'd guestimate it should be as hard to root as a non-tashed/dispelled planar mob While we're at it, pets wish Resist Magic cast on them on live were nearly unrootable or if they did get rooted, it broke within the first/2nd tick commonly, rest of durations uncommonly and RARELY IF EVER full duration. The epic pet with a resist magic I'd wager would resist every single time. Right now the difference is big enough between what's going on now vs how it worked previously that it hurts immersion tbh As far as charm resists on it... shrug use the resist check on root vs charms and find something at least close from there As I'm sure there is no "guide to winning as an epic mage in pvp" out there on the internet.. this is probs the best you'll get along with what Technique managed to find. | ||
#7
|
||||||
|
Quote:
Are Pets considered PLAYERS for a resist check, or an NPC world mob? Or do pets get their own special values? Quote:
Quote:
Is bard charm reliable on non-pet NPCS? | |||||
#8
|
|||
|
First off no were does it say charming pets makes them poof in that thread. Second off thats the ROGUE forums. If this is the reason why my pet getting charmed by a 40 bard song that cost 50 mana poofs my pet I am ashamed to say I play this server.
| ||
#9
|
|||
|
Bard charm is extremly resistable. Granted my 47 bard was charming aliz in OOT to kill seafuries he would resist charm about 30% of the time. Bard charming pets here is unresistable....
| ||
#10
|
|||
|
Everquest Patches - July 2002 to December 2002
** Pets ** - Pet Resistance Changes : Pets will now use their master's level and resistances when saving against spells cast by NPCs (against PC pets will use their own resistances and level as they always have) - unless the pet has special resistances, in which case it will use that resistance. - Altered pet summoning spells so that they always summon the most powerful pet possible, instead of pets within a 5 level range. - /pet report health now uses the same user defined color as spell text. - /pet report health will now display a list of the effects on the pet. - Mage fire pets should now cast their damage shields more often. - Wizard, Druid, and cleric pets and familiars can now be buffed by characters other than their owner. ** PVP ** - Fixed a bug on Tallon and Vallon Zek that made player characters in non-human illusions immune to ranged attacks. - It is no longer possible for PC's to fear other PC's at all on any server. The same was also done for charm. - Pets can no longer be affected by charm spells. This should fix the issue that caused charm spells to make pets disappear. - NPCs who are pets of players and call for help from other NPCs will have their cries fall on deaf ears. I am just wondering, I play this server to get the classic Everquest experience, not a pick and chose emulator experience. If you are gonna allow my pet to poof like this then you need to allow fear and charm on players. Its only classic. No matter what the justification is, it does not in any were imply that this was a "bug". There is no reasoning behind not being able to fear players and charm players but justify my pet being poofed by a charm. | ||
|
|