Enchanter charm isn't classic, we all know this

[nicemace]

one thing that needs to be considered is that during classic no one knew wtf was going on. like the skill level and knowledge about the game was minimal. with time people grew to understand the strengths of certain things like charm, once it was obvious how strong things were it started to get nerfed, such as exp from pet kills during POP.

i think you will find charm was strong in classic but we now have people who have 2 DECADES of playing experience and know how to use it to maximum benefit.

[Polycaster]

Enchs in my guild weren't seen in groups in kunark because they were all solo charming shit, often imps in solb. As several have said, it wasn't that charm broke a lot, its that people didn't understand how to do it. I played an ench on blue and if you have low cha you get beat hard (couldn't charm well until my 30s due to no JCers at the start), if you don't rune yourself and/or time stuns perfectly you drain the healers mana. Charm still breaks a lot, the good enchs just learned how to mitigate it.

[Swish]

That's the thing. I think people think it was more broken because if you level an enchanter naked (or at least with no added +CHA gear) it's going to break a lot more.

I did this on red years ago as well on my first character and it was very dicey trying to charm anything within 1-2 levels of me and have it stick for a decent duration.

I think people see charm through the lens of their twinked blue enchanters with 200+ mana, not the struggling enchanter in rags that we have been on green so far.

[DMN]

I think roots, lulls, and charms are all significantly better in p99 than in original. No proof though.

[Darkslide632]

The "Get some proof!" argument is exactly what he's talking about.

We all know it wasn't this good in 99, but "Get some proof!" rules the day.

[Tethler]

Originally Posted by Darkslide632 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The "Get some proof!" argument is exactly what he's talking about.

We all know it wasn't this good in 99, but "Get some proof!" rules the day.

It is what it is. Changing anything to something different will require devs to know that values of what things should be. It's just guessing otherwise, hence the requirement for proof.

It's like how many people know original Splitpaw dungeon was low level, but there aren't reliable records of mob levels, mob names, damage numbers, drops, etc., so they can't change it.

[Morratiz]

But...why is there no proof....

[lordpazuzu]

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

But...why is there no proof....

Verant was pretty hardcore about hiding numbers and mechanics back in the day.

[bwe]

It seems like they should have undertuned it then made it more powerful when provided with proof instead of how it is here

[bwe]

My main on blue is an enchanter and it's super fun but not classic everquest