vjek said:Aqua said: ... (and yes other classes can ruin a party just look att edict of peace from cleric hmm wonder what will happen if i cast it on the other partys tank mwwhhaaa ) ...
Edict of Peace can only be cast on an enemy. "You pacify your enemy’s will for a short time " It's basically a lull/pacify from EQ1, to be used to split up a pull/group.
FD is currently the only way that is being designed and planned to be maliciously used against other groups. They have demonstrated training in their videos.
If FD had already been adjusted in the dozens of ways that have been suggested on these forums, or even if the developers had said, at some point the past 5.5 years "We are going to fix FD, before launch, so it can't be used for malicious training of other groups"? Then no-one would care and there would be none of these concerns. Similarly, if they hadn't demonstrated it in the videos as being used that way.
Unfortunately, that's not their public design goal for FD. Their current public design goals are both that it will be used for pulling (demonstrated in videos) and malicious training (demonstrated in videos).
And if you're going to say, " vjek, they didn't mean that, they were just joking around about FD and/or training ". Really? They burned how many hours of 6 employees time and implemented the skill on the client and server, and scripted the demo, multiple times, and were just joking around, as though it isn't going to be possible? Why would you put it in the game and make several videos of it, if it wasn't possible, or not their intent? It's unfortunate that 20+ years have passed, and yet.. they're still going to allow one bored player to trivially kill off another group, with zero risk to themselves, in an entirely PvE game.
They have had 5.5 years of time to gather and use some of the great ideas from the community to fix FD and/or training. Nope! Not going to do it! It's like they're intentionally coding in social toxicity to spite the community for having better ideas, as ridiculous as that sounds.
yeah good call sorry for that hmm need more coffie...
meant :
A word of peace surrounds your ally, causing their activities to generate less Hate for the duration of the effect.
Hey dident i say it was edict od peace =O
well it dosent matter to me but my point is that many things can be used for good teamwork or pure demonic purpose its all in the person behind the keyboard.
Sadly like everything people have different opinion just look att the forum and you get flamed however you write,it just how it is best regards Aqua
disposalist said:For something as fundamental as being able to easily travel the world, I'm still concerned that two classes get 'control' of this for seemingly no other reason than traditional class definitions.
What is the balancing downside to Wizards and Druids that they should get such an amazing travel ability?
Most people are saying that everyeone who wants to use travel routes should do a quest or at least have to visit them. I agree. But then every class should be able to use them without waiting for, begging for or more likely paying for a Wizard or Druid to click a hotbar button.
An exacerbating point of concern from the newsletter: "At higher levels, Druids/Wizards will be able to teleport themselves to the primary Gateway or Wandering Stone in order to access the network more quickly". In other words they don't even have to be at a gateway to teleport around the world. In EQ at least they had to evac to get near a gateway and then do a bit of running, or they had to waste their time sitting at a gateway offering taxi services. Now TeleTaxis will be able to be at your gateway in seconds no matter what they were doing.
Sounds like it will be like EQ (which trivialised travel quite badly) but worse. Instant worldwide taxi service as long as you are a Wizard, Druid or rich enough to tempt one out of a dungeon.
/whisper MrWizTaxi "100 coins if you abandon your group and TP me now!"
Personally, I think it would be best if teleport gateways worked like a boat or wagon service, but were obviously quicker in the actual transport. Still on a schedule (every 30/60 minutes maybe?) and still from a terminal/gateway/whatever, but without the hours of staring at the sea/road. And *all* people/classes should be able to pay/quest/whatever the gateway keeper in order to use them. If wizards/druids must have some kind of teleport ability (not sure why, but if they must) then perhaps make it so they can teleport *to* particular terminals, but still must use the schedule and pay the keeper.
I agree with everything here.
I'm not trying to say Nerf the Wizards and Druids!!! But this seems a bit like you're allowing two classes to travel the world as fast as they want, while everyone else will have to pay them to help. I'd rather not see instant travel be allowed by any classes but if they do exsist, don't make it so two classes in the game become rich from being able to monopolize it.
oneADseven said:FD was by far the most broken ability in EQ2 and allowed for some incredibly destructive gameplay. It allowed monks (fighter archetype) to be the best "scout" (a separate archetype reserved for rangers/assassins/troubadors/dirges/swashbucklers/brigands) in the game. There were plenty of mobs that could see through invis or stealth but for whatever reason they were consistently fooled by monks/bruisers with FD. This created a situation where a single monk could navigate (flop) through an entire raid zone faster than a full raid team (24 players) of max-progression players who actually cleared content along the way. The amount of time that was saved due to FD-based content circumvention was astounding in that game. These natural counters that Joppa has discussed are absolutely necessary for Pantheon if we want players to respect the environment. Monks/Bruisers were also notorious for being able to train through zones and cherry-pick bosses, often at the expense of full groups.
we could say that VR is doing things right
in EQ1, rogues with stealth could practically walk around any part of the game
As you say it seems that this was corrected in EQ2 but the problem arose that the monk surpassed them as explorers by the FD
it seems that in the Pantheon they will correct that
In EQ2, Rogues were part of the Scout archetype, and as such, should be the best at "Scouting", in that game.
If VR wants Monks to be better scouts than Rogues? They're doing everything right, so far.
It seems strange to me that Monks would be better Scouts than Rogues, but it's not my game to make.
Prior to Planes of Power AA's, EQ1 Rogue hide+sneak had some very specific limitations, and many mobs that could see through it.
I remember, vividly, the /con'ing of mobs in the Plane of Hate , because some of them could see a hidden+sneaked Rogue (me).
And having to wait for them not to be facing me to get past them, for example.
IVU + Invis was vastly better in 99% of the cases, anyway, making any class that could or was inclined do that (IVU potion + invis pot, or spells) better at CR anyway, without the movement rate slow-down.
vjek said:disposalist said: ... What is the balancing downside to Wizards and Druids that they should get such an amazing travel ability? ...It's interesting you should bring that up.
Historically, Druids and Wizards combat value was balanced around their non-combat teleportation. It was included in every "combat adjustment" effort to balance them as a class.
Unfortunately, it shouldn't be. Class value in combat should look at combat abilities, spells, and similar, only.
If you think of it in the reverse, you can see how it's illogical: Let's balance non-combat abilities based on what a class can do in combat? Woah, no. stop, why would you do that?
Yet: Let's balance combat abilities based on what a class can do out of combat: Ok, sounds good!
Objectively the two should be separate, yet emotionally and practically, they never are.
In my opinion, if teleportation as a concept is going to be in the game, and you want the most flexibility in content generation, then EQ1's Origin ability is the end result. You can return to your point of origin before you login, and while in-game once every 15-20 minutes. Doesn't matter what you class is. As long as you're out of combat, you can do that. Eliminates all /stuck tickets, completely.
Coupled with your items never leaving your body, the burden on CS is reduced to zero for more than half of the typical tickets. When you're forced to pay actual humans minimum wage 24x7, you start to re-consider in-game GM's and ticket burden starts to become a very high priority.
Otherwise, disposalist, as you've correctly pointed out, Wizards & Druids will forever be considered a "pocket" class, and druids in Pantheon even more, since they get a rez. A max level Druid will be an expectation, after the first one reaches max level. Dual boxing a Druid is what most of the players in my guild are planning, as their first run through. It will then be used to ease or remove all of the typical penalties of the leveling process. Do I wish it was this way? No. But, this is the public design goal for Pantheon, today, so we're planning on using it.
Personally, I don't see any reason why teleportation scrolls couldn't completely replace the ability of druids and wizards to move groups or individuals around the world, in addition to an "Origin" type ability for all classes to alleviate the CS burden.
Using consumables for fast travel, to me, seems like a great tuning knob to put in place. I would also use evac scrolls for the same reason. Anyone could have one, and anyone could use it to evac their entire group.
Permit half of the PC crafters to make evac effect objects, or allow it to be a clicky effect imbued on arbitrary crafted items with a respectable cooldown..
Or have them be rechargeable items, and you have to use faction credit to recharge them.
Or put all the scrolls/charged-items (personal teleport, group teleport, evac) on NPC faction vendors, and make them expensive, so players have to donate, sacrifice, or similar from their adventuring to obtain them.
I simply see it as a solved problem, once VR decided to have teleportation of any kind in the game. There are many ways to solve the problem elegantly, they're just (currently) going with the traditional EQ1 route, with all it's known problems. At some point, playing the game has to be fun. The last thing I want is to have Pantheon be a running simulator like PFO.
Lets get rid of tanks also, we can just use a summon pet scroll while at it.
Yaladan said: ... Lets get rid of tanks also, we can just use a summon pet scroll while at it.Seems a bit extreme to me, but.. is the implication from your (hopefully sarcastic) suggestion that Wizards and Druids are of no value, and might as well be removed, without teleportation?
vjek said:Yaladan said: ... Lets get rid of tanks also, we can just use a summon pet scroll while at it.Seems a bit extreme to me, but.. is the implication from your (hopefully sarcastic) suggestion that Wizards and Druids are of no value, and might as well be removed, without teleportation?
Because if so... that seems to re-inforce the point that teleportation tied to those two classes isn't balanced.
Sadly in terms of wizard and mostly druids they are of a great value to dualboxing because of the quality of life they provide :(
because the harder a game gets these attributes are of very high value and trust me if you get 2 choices turn right spank 2 goblins turn left get spanked by 10 giants you will turn right, so i understand why druids are a nice dualbox choice.
but it is really hard to balance teleportation i give everyone that ><
vjek said:Yaladan said: ... Lets get rid of tanks also, we can just use a summon pet scroll while at it.Seems a bit extreme to me, but.. is the implication from your (hopefully sarcastic) suggestion that Wizards and Druids are of no value, and might as well be removed, without teleportation?
Because if so... that seems to re-inforce the point that teleportation tied to those two classes isn't balanced.
My whole point really that with the logic you indicate you could strip any class of individuality and the reason to choose a class based on the of combat abilities they have, rogues dont need sneak if we use an invis scroll, no need for a rez spell for any, class just get a scroll. I have nothing negative to add or imply about people dual boxing but the majority of players as far as I know usually play only one character at the time and the interdependency between classes is at the core of what this game is trying to acomplish. There will be travel options other than teleportation via wizards and druids avaiable.
The game is not even out for us so we really dont know how the balance of abilities will be played out. Of course we can only make a comparison from previous mmo's.
For travel, I think the big thing I would want to see for overworld teleports is a requirement that everybody get there on foot once first and "attune" to it. Not just the wizard or the druid, but the warrior, the ranger, the cleric - everybody. If someone in the druid's group hasn't attuned to the wandering stone at the destination, they can't take the port.
That still allows group ports to be a thing, and it still allows people to use them for regions that they have visited before. It just prevents someone from getting a taxi ride to somewhere they have never been. Yes, maybe that's inconvenient for someone working up an alt - but too bad. I don't think VR should cater to alts and boxed accounts at the expense of trivializing travel for mains. Maybe it's inconvenient when you have a group and one person hasn't attuned yet, but again - I don't think that's a valid reason not to do it. If anything, I think that promotes long-term socialization. If Pantheon is a game where we're grouping with different people every night and we hardly ever see them again after that, then it hasn't really solved the socialization problems that plague current MMOs, regardless of whether it has a dungeon finder or not. If ports are always coming from someone's dedicated alt on a second or third account, is that really social gameplay? Or is it just players subverting the intent of the system to make things more convenient for themselves?
Bikmer said:I would only like to add to what has already been expressed. There needs to be some diversity within a class. Getting stuck to just always be the tank for example because you chose to play a war seems very old school, which is fine to a point. I would like to see a warrior be able to evolove into being a Tanking Warrior vs a DSP Warrior or the option to do both depending on what equipment you gear. (After all Warriors are battle masters engaged in conflict! not just tank you very much!
Definition of warrior
: a person engaged or experienced in warfarebroadly : a person engaged in some struggle or conflict
I agree with this to a point. I think that all the tanks should have access to some sort of damage capabilities. One of the things that I find lacking in the current class system is a DPS that is focused primarily around using two-handed weapons. The dire lord comes close but they are classified as a tank and have more defensive capabilities vs offensive capabilities.
However, I start to worry when there is talk about adding DPS to a tank class. I think that in all honesty, the warrior class could have the potential to be broken up into two very distinctive classes: Guardians and Berserkers. Guardians would basically be what the warrior class is now with an emphasis on tanking and shielding and Berserkers would have emphasis on two-handed, enrages, bleeds, heal reductions... etc.
Yaladan said: My whole point really that with the logic you indicate you could strip any class of individuality and the reason to choose a class based on the of combat abilities they have, ...So, up to this point, all "Quaternity" balancing is with respect to combat only. If there is some new info that says that combat class/role interdependency is based on crafting, or diplomacy, or harvesting, or non-combat, that would be new. Stripping a class of their individuality, with respect to their non-combat abilities, should always be on the table, unless every class gets a non-combat role equivalent to teleportation. (not a good plan) Put another way, quaternity balance and interdependence should only take combat roles into consideration.
@vjek Ok I see you point a bit more clear now, unfortunately the path this game is going towards is not for a minority of dual boxers in general specially when it has been stated that for maximizing combat potential in higher encounter will require a single focus on a class, however dont forget the non combat passive abilities an other things they may have that will require some balancing as well such as racial abilities and not to mention crafting, we really dont know much on what will be available also.
Nephele said:For travel, I think the big thing I would want to see for overworld teleports is a requirement that everybody get there on foot once first and "attune" to it. Not just the wizard or the druid, but the warrior, the ranger, the cleric - everybody. If someone in the druid's group hasn't attuned to the wandering stone at the destination, they can't take the port.
That still allows group ports to be a thing, and it still allows people to use them for regions that they have visited before. It just prevents someone from getting a taxi ride to somewhere they have never been. Yes, maybe that's inconvenient for someone working up an alt - but too bad. I don't think VR should cater to alts and boxed accounts at the expense of trivializing travel for mains. Maybe it's inconvenient when you have a group and one person hasn't attuned yet, but again - I don't think that's a valid reason not to do it. If anything, I think that promotes long-term socialization. If Pantheon is a game where we're grouping with different people every night and we hardly ever see them again after that, then it hasn't really solved the socialization problems that plague current MMOs, regardless of whether it has a dungeon finder or not. If ports are always coming from someone's dedicated alt on a second or third account, is that really social gameplay? Or is it just players subverting the intent of the system to make things more convenient for themselves?
its first point is not that it will affect me, I will play when the game comes out from minute 1 and I will explore the world, possibly I will reach the druid and wizard stones even before they
on the other hand I am not an alters man I will spend all my time with my main if the game allows me to do interesting things
but I still don't feel it right because I should tune in to other class skills
As a second point, one of Brad's premises is to keep the groups together and so open a caravan system that we don't know much about yet but if you disconnect and your group continues when you connect you will have the option to appear where they
this seems to directly clash with a group using a tp leaving behind a person who was not tuned (who knows maybe that person only has to disconnect before the tp and reconnect after they attach to the tp and carava system I took it with them, it just seems absurd to me?)
third point VR is not making a world with significant trips and then they will put a TP network that trivializes it
they are making a world with a TP network in which the trips are significant please stop thinking that DEVs are stupid
fourth point this is not especially for you people below I talk more about this topic
BOX will be one thing because VR allows it (I personally do not but it is not my game) people who plan to do BOX will do it anyway
curiously they say that they will become druids none will make a wizard
They don't do it just because of the tps, maybe without Tps they will continue to become druids or maybe not, but what I know for sure is that they will continue to make BOX choose the class they choose because it is their way of playing
Vjek VR want to create a world not a game in that world combat will be the most important part but not only the skills of each class does not have to be separated into combat skills and non-combat skills
I know that for some people they just want a game (combat) and all that is not combat is wasting time I think those people should assume that Pantheon won't be like that
I agree with Nephele. There should be and probably *will* be a balance between allowing the travel skills to make the world feel small and trivial, and making it so limited that it is virtually useless.
One way to do this is to require anyone benefitting from the teleport to have already been to the destination area. Thus the skill can be used to avoid repeat trips without avoiding the need to travel the world at least once the slow way.
One way is to require anyone benefitting from the teleport to be at least the level needed for the caster to use the group teleport in the first place. Thus, lower levels need to travel the slow way until fairly late in the game.
((At higher levels, Druids/Wizards will be able to teleport themselves to the primary Gateway or Wandering Stone in order to access the network more quickly. In addition, they’ll eventually be able to bring their group members with them through the Gateway/Wandering Stone network.))
Note that the newsletter says that the caster needs to reach "higher levels" to cast a teleport. And even after this they cannot teleport others. The ability to teleport others comes "eventually" which clearly implies a significant number of levels to go from self teleport to group teleport.
Elki said that because Panteon focuses on promoting grouping and social conduct it is a bad thing to force a group to leave behind a person who does not satisfy such requirements.
I do not agree. Surely few of us would argue that just because someone happens to join a group they should somehow be exempt from any level requirements for content or any keying requirements for content or any other requirements for content. Surely few of us would argue that a level one in a group with level 50s should be automatically buffed up to level 50 because any character at any level and regardless of gear or experience should be immediately able to do anything that any other character could do.
Dorotea I haven't said it's bad
I said that one of brad's premises is to keep the groups together and the caravan we know little about is a mechanic result of this.
and make the druid or wizard leave behind people in his group when making a TP directly clashes with Brad's premise
which what they are asking for doesn't seem logical to me Brad creates new mechanics to keep the groups together and you suggest that existing mechanics be changed to do the opposite
about having level restrictions for spells I think it has its good part and its bad part as long as it is for all spells and classes
so that a lvl 1 enters a group of lvl 50 and is combined in 50 well it sounds a bit like the straw man fallacy
I've only read Nephele's original post, so I appologize if I am reposting or addressign something someone else origianlly stated - I agree 100% with Nephele's concerns (aside from the Lore, which will literally do nothing to contribute to the longevity/success of the game and only get people excited to initially start playing). All of the points Neph made were very legitimate concerns and frankly I "personally" feel (opinion incoming) that the game will have to cater to the modern style of MMO players in order to increase and even maintain a sustainable player base (which means trivializing those concerns); the topics addressed that I agree with wholeheartedly are the trivialization of travel, the normalization of resurrection, the abuse of feign death/stealth and the need to have a shield wielding tank. These are all of my same "concerns" although I have come to expect the worst and hope for the best.
Edit: A lot of people on these forums aren't thinking about the long game and are only thinking (like a new MMO player) about the first 6-20 months of playing an MMO. Some of us are looking at the long game.
Darch said:I've only read Nephele's original post, so I appologize if I am reposting or addressign something someone else origianlly stated - I agree 100% with Nephele's concerns (aside from the Lore, which will literally do nothing to contribute to the longevity/success of the game and only get people excited to initially start playing). All of the points Neph made were very legitimate concerns and frankly I "personally" feel (opinion incoming) that the game will have to cater to the modern style of MMO players in order to increase and even maintain a sustainable player base (which means trivializing those concerns); the topics addressed that I agree with wholeheartedly are the trivialization of travel, the normalization of resurrection, the abuse of feign death/stealth and the need to have a shield wielding tank. These are all of my same "concerns" although I have come to expect the worst and hope for the best.
Edit: A lot of people on these forums aren't thinking about the long game and are only thinking (like a new MMO player) about the first 6-20 months of playing an MMO. Some of us are looking at the long game.
I 100% disagree with lore not contributing to the longevity of the game. I believe good mechanics that project real metaphors is the key to longevity.
Nagasakee said:Riahuf22 said:Feign Death is one of the few abilities that is powerful and can directly render other players desire to enjoy the game, unlike clerics rezing and wizards and druids teleporting, these abilities don't hurt other people out of their grp. Though taking it out completely would hurt the class quite a bit, I believe having it even as close to as strong as it was in EQ would be just as big as a mistake.
You must mean the ability that's been in Everquest 20+ years and is still there?
The one that was added in Everquest 2 and is still there??
Or the one Brad McQuaid added to Vanguard Saga of Heroes???
This ability has tremendous positive influence for other classes. They include Raid and Group pulling, Mob splitting and tagging, Corpse recovery etc etc.
*IF* you are worried about malicious training (and I think that IS a legimate concern) then code can be put in that the pulled mobs don't aggro on anyone but the puller. (Edit: or Monk's group, or Monk's Raid) That's been done on other games..."you have established ownership" etc. Other than that I don't see any possible way a pull can hurt another group. Other classes of course can pull,or kite, root the mob and teleport away so the here- comes-my-bad-pull mechanics exist outside of the monk class. But no one asks to remove kiting. I do think Pantheon will enforce civil game conduct (or at least I hope so) and our in game reputations will become extremely important.
SOE and now DayBreak, and Sigil did not see this FD ability as either overpowered or overly negative to their games, and why all three companies put the ability into game and left it there. They gave it to the Monk for their class defining ability. Further SOE must have seen this as an overall positive thing, and I back this up by reminding you that other classes (for example Necromancers) ALSO got this ability, albeit in spell format.
I'm not angry with you at all here, but I think you contention that this somehow ruins the game for other groups doesn't stand up to scrutiny. I do think you'll find VG will do a superb job with the Monk class and I wouldn't be overly concerned about it. We can't be class vs class here, or as they used to say "You've ruined your lands, you won't ruin mine!" :)
Finally, the absolute MOST important use of FD. The Potty Pause Button. I contend (without ANY facts of course) that the #1 use of FD was for Beer-Swilling Monks was as a safety Bio Break. We are all a LOT older now and likely drink better beer. I know I'm visiting the loo more often nowadays :)
This feature is a must Aradune!!!!!!
You do realize I said not to remove it right? But think for it to be toned down to not be as powerful wouldn't be overall bad either, so instead of writing an entire book of why you think FD should stay as a main feature on a monk, maybe realize I never said to get rid of it.
My take on the ports and Teleprts is they actually might be more of a PITA than a short cut. Lets say the adventurers travel 6 zones west from "town" to get to "the place". Laden down with loot and stuff to sell, they then need to head 6 zones east, but the druid port is 3 zones north of "the place", and ports to a point 2 zones south of "town".
East and west, the zones are laden with a few orc camps, some nests, open caves/dungeons, some gypsy camps and a few archai guard outposts. One member of the group has archai monk faction so they can get help from natural beasts from the guards if they need it, but not against magical beasts or spectres. The group can avoid the orcs, one rogue in the group has some coveted gypsy faction but its sketchy at best and wavers so there is a possibility to sell some things at a deep loss, or at least buy some provisions, maybe safe-camp. East west is a journey, but doable- definitely a "lets camp out and come back tomorrow in RL" kind of thing.
Heading north is, shorter but they wil have to climb and jump and the problem is; if you die, you drop- making a CR very much a pain. Heavy with loot it may take longer and, there are griffons. If there are other people travelling to and fro from the port spots, it could be safe just by virtue of people being there. Even if the group dies en route, someone may find them and be kind, but only if traffic is heading south from druid port. People may be heading north these days..
Tthe other bummer is, 2 zones south of town is- think of Skyfire and sirens grotto. They look innocent enough but one wrong turn, or one pause too long and suddenly you can't get away from all the random roamers that seem to zero in on your position and then of course those dispelling mobs come in.
Yeah, its shorter, but is it really worth it? In some cases it will be but for longer journeys I think the trade off will be something like, longer journey but gradually increasing risk or shorter journey with high unexpected risk.
((which what they are asking for doesn't seem logical to me Brad creates new mechanics to keep the groups together and you suggest that existing mechanics be changed to do the opposite))
Difficult travel and easy grouping *are* inherently contradictory objectives - VR will need to find ways to keep the world large while at the same time allowing people to group without it typically taking an hour to get a new group assembled. Caravan is one mechanic to help with this (coming from Vanguard I wouldn't call it a new mechanic any more than I would call a druid teleport, coming from EQ, a new mechanic). Call of Heros may or may not be another. Allowing player teleports clearly facilitates grouping and just as clearly shrinks the world.
((so that a lvl 1 enters a group of lvl 50 and is combined in 50 well it sounds a bit like the straw man fallacy))
I thought of it more as reductio ad absurdum (didn't look up the spelling) but close enough. The point was, of course, that some basic game mechanics will make it harder to group. And we won't want to sacrifice these game mechanics on an alter of convenience for grouping. A less ridiculous example is that races will start in different areas and there is no intent as of now to have fast travel between the starting areas so that if I play one race and a friend plays another we can group.
I've only been trained by a monk twice. Once by accident. Both times it was only 8-10 mobs so locking them down wasn't that much of a struggle once the instant of shock wore off. My group both times took care of it. If I was in a brand new group and they were unfamiliar with how I play, then yeah, that could be an issue for me. On a similar note, this is why if we have a Monk in group, I either tell them not to pull and be the DPS since we lose efficiency if you're always out pulling, or if you have to, by all means, grab 3-5 of them at a time.
With that said, it's still likely that around mid to late Alpha, we may see FD worked on to eliminate certain issues that may creep up within the world of greifing. I honestly don't see them removing it, but I could be wrong.
Janus said:I've only been trained by a monk twice. Once by accident. Both times it was only 8-10 mobs so locking them down wasn't that much of a struggle once the instant of shock wore off. My group both times took care of it. If I was in a brand new group and they were unfamiliar with how I play, then yeah, that could be an issue for me. On a similar note, this is why if we have a Monk in group, I either tell them not to pull and be the DPS since we lose efficiency if you're always out pulling, or if you have to, by all means, grab 3-5 of them at a time.
With that said, it's still likely that around mid to late Alpha, we may see FD worked on to eliminate certain issues that may creep up within the world of greifing. I honestly don't see them removing it, but I could be wrong.
I don't see them removing it either, but i believe having either certain mobs, kind of like how mobs with laterns might be able to see invis/sneak, should be able to catch someone who is FD, kind of like a mobs with a pike, or shiv walking around stabbing at corpses both real corpses (players who have actually died, and FD players that way, you don't feel completely safe and can FD in a spot for 20 hours afk whch is something they can do in every game that has FD. It's just to be personally i dont see anything wrong with having a mob counter a part of your kit, every other class has to deal with it, like wizards not able to use fire on fire elementals, some being immune to movement impairment effect, invis/sneak, you name it and a mob somewhere or many for that fact are imune to those, but with FD theres nothing, cept if you did a failed flop, but that shouldn't be the only thing that makes it unsuccessful, they're should be something else to make it to where they cant flop through the entire zone with little fear, and they can try to make it sound as dangerous as they want, but if it was really that dangerous not every monk on EQ, and EQ2 would be doing it, it would of only been a handful at best.