Spell Casting and Ducking/Jumping

[nilbog]

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

However since it was about when Kunark came out that it was added, and Kunark is about upon us here, I must ask, why bother about it now just to put it back in a month or so?

Ducking was added as a means to interrupt spells in the July 2001 patch. That is towards the end of Velious.

[Virtuosos]

ducking NOT interupting spells confuses me seeing as how every time i am trying to turn my homework into frogs and i duck, it immediately stops me from doing it



real life should thus follow EQ



id love to see you cast a spell while ducking and it NOT cancel it immediately!

[Malrubius]

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

I'm hearing that jumping is still suppose to interrupt instantly? Can people confirm/deny this? If so I can consider making that change.

Yes, I was always able to jump to instantly interrupt. The only time it did not work was when I was levitated (in which case it would never work for obvious reasons - you can't jump when levitated).

[Knightmare]

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

Ducking was added as a means to interrupt spells in the July 2001 patch. That is towards the end of Velious.

Wow. Okay, I didn't realize I started playing that long before Velious [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I'd still wonder if it's worth taking out such a simple mechanic after about a year of having it, just to put it in next year.

Or do you think it would stay out permanently?

[nilbog]

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

Wow. Okay, I didn't realize I started playing that long before Velious [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I'd still wonder if it's worth taking out such a simple mechanic after about a year of having it, just to put it in next year.

Or do you think it would stay out permanently?

I think its important to note that classic Kunark existed on every eq live server with that not being an option. Directly or indirectly, that's the way classic played out. Every spell that was cast.. from 1999-2001.

As far as the worth of removing it a year after it being present, the same could be said for class experience penalties. They will be removed on schedule.

FD not breaking charm, while a functioning classic mechanic, should exist and then be removed. No one is complaining about that one though. [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[Knightmare]

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

As far as the worth of removing it a year after it being present, the same could be said for class experience penalties. They will be removed on schedule.

I might be confused but from the way I'm reading it all (again I could have it wrong), it sounds like the duck-stop cast has been in for about a year, needs to be taken out for about a year, and then later put right back in.

Is that right?

Kinda sounds confusing, and potentially going into the OCd department lol, just imho that is [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I'd still swear I was doing it on my nub iksar necro but apparently not.

[nilbog]

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

I might be confused but from the way I'm reading it all (again I could have it wrong), it sounds like the duck-stop cast has been in for about a year, needs to be taken out for about a year, and then later put right back in.

Is that right?

Kinda sounds confusing, and potentially going into the OCd department lol, just imho that is [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I'd say more like.. "Fundamental feature that hasn't existed in prekunark due to lack of development implementation, but needs to exist for the entirety of Kunark, and most of Velious."

The classic changes we implement, that are time-based, have an off/on function created to go with them. Example the FD mechanic, and the class experience penalties.

If we ever get enough people for a secondary classic server, (hypothetical, in the future scenario), we can easily make these changes.

If you're suggesting we should avoid developing classic features, time-based or not, I disagree.

[Sarkov]

The principle of the thing is obvious. No one could sensibly argue otherwise.

I guess the question is, should community reaction to the feature drive your priorities, since you're working with limited time & resources here? Dunno, your call.

No one would be sad if this was a priority negative 50 fix though. Just sayin.

[nilbog]

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

The principle of the thing is obvious. No one could sensibly argue otherwise.

I guess the question is, should community reaction to the feature drive your priorities, since you're working with limited time & resources here? Dunno, your call.

No one would be sad if this was a priority negative 50 fix though. Just sayin.

It is my belief that a human being VERY RARELY chooses to nerf itself, if ever.

I don't see that anyone would agree with implementing it, but I don't agree that's a reason we shouldn't do it.

It's like we are recreating a historical event, and saying, hey guys no one likes black powder guns, we should use automatics.

Matter of opinion I suppose. I know for a fact there are situations that would have ended poorly due to user-error, that aren't happening because of a safety feature.

[Knightmare]

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

If you're suggesting we should avoid developing classic features, time-based or not, I disagree.

Oh no, not saying that. By all means develop away! [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

My confusion is this:

Ducking currently stops spell casting in P99 instantly (if memory serves, I'm at work atm). By the original post it looks like Rogean is saying it shouldn't do that, and wants to remove it until we get to that "June 27, 2001 3:00 am" patch date in P99 time.

Which would mean removing a current function because it doesn't belong. Then permanently putting it back later when it should be (late in Velious).

Is that accurate?

Huh this is why I shouldn't post at work. Well, 1 reason anyway [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]