Enchanter charm isn't classic, we all know this

[Frostback]

Playing the enchanter is by far no easy task, but reaps the greatest benefits, and definitely earns the title of being the 'best' pure caster.

Careful when charming a creature. Only do it when your CHA is high and the target has been Tashaned. Once the creature is out of the charm, it will attack you. It is not possible to Charm something that is out of your spell range cap, however you can still Charm beings that may be red to you (I charmed by first griffin at 31). A good charm with the lowest charm spell may last up to about 5 minutes, and the duration increases with a better charm spell.

https://web.archive.org/web/20000621...enc_ruri.shtml

[Dolalin]

All the speculation about CHA in these chanter charming guides is basically useless, nobody was doing any objective testing until people started doing it in those links I posted earlier. It's all feels and old wives tales and people believing their own superstitious nonsense. The effect on charm was tiny and got lost in the noise.

(There was good evidence for an effect on mez, but that's not the issue here.)

Tashan always had a big impact though and it's plain to see in the testing done back then. The effect of MR on charm breaks was massive.

I'd love to swing the nerf bat at chanters but so far I haven't seen classic evidence to justify it, or where you would even swing it. The mechanics on p99 are pretty faithful to classic it seems?

[Nirgon]

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

I (still) can't lifetap raid bosses. Your classic arguments are invalid. Non-classic changes are made when the project admins deem it necessary. For folks who dislike current Enchanter power, continuing to visibly and loudy complain is the best way to eventually bring the admins around to such a change (ie, keep it up). As the recent experience with the pet window demonstrated, the squeaky wheel gets the grease.

Danth

Why don't they just make spirit tap the one that gets resisted Mr Danth

Anyone got ahhh much better in their dragonslaying logs of old? Torven maybe?

[cd288]

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

No, Nilbog is here to re-create classic EverQuest. And anyone being honest who played back then knows Enchanters here are nothing like they were on live: Nilbog is failing in some sense at re-creating classic EverQuest (and in all fairness, the guy has succeeded at umpteen million other decisions, so this is in no way a personal attack, just a "he's human" point).

It's exactly the same thing with Bards AoEing every mob in The Overthere. Every step, every last decision that Nilbog made which enabled it was absolutely 100% classic and correct ... but a single Bard making it impossible for anyone to get XP in the zone absolutely was not classic.

Even though Nilbog knew he'd made every decision about Bards correctly, he still took a step back and saw that something wasn't right. And that must have been incredibly difficult for him: no one is good at seeing their own mistakes, and if it wasn't for the massive CSR problem the Bards created, I'm not sure he even would have.

But he did! He realized something was missing, and it wasn't any individual game mechanic that he'd gotten wrong: it was that he hadn't considered how significant an "X factor" (1999 latency) was in making an emulated EverQuest server feel like a real EverQuest server.

Once he did, he emulated better. Even though he literally added an unclassic mechanic, the server felt far more classic as a result. Other than Bards who want to XP faster, I don't think anyone can argue the server would be more classic with AoE monopolies in OT.

Similarly, I don't think anyone can honestly argue that P99 really feels like 1999 when NO ONE remembers Enchanter charming being so prevalent, and basic logic dictates that it couldn't have been purely player ignorance.

Respectfully, I'm somewhat amazed at how many gigantic lengthy replies you've written in this thread without actually presenting any evidence for anything. If the answer is evidence can't be found, then that's the end of the discussion.

[cd288]

Originally Posted by kul69 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Silly to argue the "classic" angle. A lot of changes were already made to nerf classic things that are OP. Enchanter charm is obviously one of these things at least at lower levels. Charm at high levels isn't even that bad, it's the ridiculous chanter in every group with everyone supporting their pet from level 1-30 that I've seen. This is nowhere near a classic EQ experience.

I love how your original argument got totally wrecked so you're now reverting to the "well there weren't this many Enchanters on live because people didn't realize how powerful they were and therefore they should be nerfed" argument lol

At this point, we might as well start putting limits on the amount of people who can be playing a class on the server. Oh and also force some people to play other classes; for example, there were more Wizards, Rogues, and Warriors on live at launch, so people need to be forced to play those so that we can truly recreate the classic experience. Gimme a break lmao.

[Wurl]

Originally Posted by cd288 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

If the answer is evidence can't be found, then that's the end of the discussion.

The thing is, evidence can't be found to justify the way charm works CURRENTLY on P99. Should what the EQEmu developers wrote 10+ years ago really just be accepted as infallible truth?

[loramin]

Originally Posted by cd288 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Respectfully, I'm somewhat amazed at how many gigantic lengthy replies you've written in this thread without actually presenting any evidence for anything. If the answer is evidence can't be found, then that's the end of the discussion.

Respectfully, you completely ignored what I wrote.

I gave the example of Bard's AoEing, and how there was similarly no evidence that there was anything unclassic whatsoever about the mechanics. So if your argument is "there must be classic mechanic proof to fix anything", then you're essentially arguing for Bards to still take every mob in OT, and I reject your argument.

My argument is, EVEN THOUGH there was no classic mechanic, a simple "gut check" could tell anyone who played on live that P99 had something wrong. Bards on live did not monopoilze The Overthere, and it was very much NOT just because "players were dumb in '99". When the staff fixed that, using an unclassic mechanic, it made the server overall more classic.

I honestly don't know whether the charm resists here are right or not, and again no one truly does. But what I do know is that no one remembers Enchanter charm being like this on live: regardless of classic evidence, it fails the "gut check".

When something like that is massively different here, anyone who wants things to be "like 1999" has to honestly ask themself: could this difference truly be explained with just player ignorance? And I think anyone being honest has to answer "no", which implies that a correction (classic or unclassic) is needed to make this place more classic.

[cd288]

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

The thing is, evidence can't be found to justify the way charm works CURRENTLY on P99. Should what the EQEmu developers wrote 10+ years ago really just be accepted as infallible truth?

It's sort of an interesting argument to point at something and say "that's wrong you need to change it even though I can't provide any evidence that it's wrong" and then put the burden of proof on the other party. That's not how change requests work.

Go put in some research time, see if you can find actual legitimate evidence, and then post it. You don't get to come demand a change and shift your burden of proof to someone else lol

[Wurl]

Originally Posted by cd288 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

demand a change

Actually, I've presented some interesting arguments and links in this thread and made no demands. You're demanding that things stay the same.

[strawman]

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

The thing is, evidence can't be found to justify the way charm works CURRENTLY on P99. Should what the EQEmu developers wrote 10+ years ago really just be accepted as infallible truth?

P99 isn't using the stock eqemu charm code

https://www.project1999.com/forums/s...d.php?t=339224