dalamar wrote:
Gilgon wrote:
You have to be a pretty big newb to not train art on a bard, and it has nothing to do with the effectiveness of songs.
Why people who are awful at pk/have little experience in it insist on writing about things that relate to pk and acting as if they have authority on the subject is hilarious to me.
I know you'll find this hard to believe, but you really aren't the shining beacon of SK magnificence that you think you are.
Yeah, sorry, I know that's a hard pill for you to swallow, and the thought probably hurts your feelings, but it's really time to accept reality.
I have repeatedly stated that all of my 'shining SK knowledge' that I provide in forums is from a purely tactical standpoint. I am not telling people to rp their bard as training art, nor do I really care. I am telling them that strategically, in order to have the most effective bard in player killing, people should max their art. It isn't complex. You - certainly - are not even close to the shining beacon of SK player killing knowledge.
dalamar wrote:
There are some characters who are created and exist purely for PK. They will be plevelled and once attaining a certain level, they will do nothing but PK until deletion.
There are other characters who are created and exist purely for RP.
And yet there are other characters who are created and their players have a very full playing experience, running the gamut from experimenting and learning their characters, exploring new areas, roleplaying their character, and some lesser amount of PK.
These posts do not ask if roleplaying training art is a good idea. This question is completely and purely related to the success of a character through the tactical/strategic portion of the game. That's why I answered without any [REDACTED] about the roleplay of training different bard stats and whether or not a bard would enjoy training art.
dalamar wrote:
Then there is the concept of PK itself. Some people consider their PK experiences "successful" if they simply survive the vast majority of PK they enter into. Some people consider it success if they score more kills than their own deaths. And yet others consider it success only if they kill large numbers of people, regardless of method, sportsmanship, etc.
It doesn't matter which concept people are referring to. This suggestion applies equally to all of them - bards should max art.
dalamar wrote:
There are different ways to play, different ways to PK, and different ways to guage character "success".
We aren't talking about the first or the third. We are talking about the most effective way to do the second thing. Why you feel like you have any authority whatsoever to talk about the tactical portion of this mud is beyond me. Why you feel like you can put up a haughty air when the only succesful ganks you have done involved the use of the slay command is, equally, quite beyond me.
dalamar wrote:
And Gilgon's simply are not representative of the entire MUD, nor do they need to be. Why people who have a long history of rules violations, questionable ethical behavior & tactics, and run-ins with the immstaff insist on taking a haughty air, as if they have authority on anything or the right to talk down to anybody is hilarious to me.
My rule violations on past characters, my 'questionable ethical behavior' (like repeatingly killing an experienced player over and over one day to show how unfair a certain ability was) and my 'questionable tactics' involving JUNK LOOTING people after they die! have nothing to do with how effective I am at giving advise on something such as whether or not bards should max art. I am not telling people that they don't rp well, I am not telling people that they have a 'crappy' character in regards to anything other than player killing. I do, however, think I have -far- more right than you to make a suggestion regarding the way someone builds their character specifically for player killing.
dalamar wrote:
Personally, I have only played 2 bards. The first never passed journeyman, the second reached master. There is a lot I want to still test with a bard that I haven't had a chance to do. It is possible that I may change my mind after seeing more evidence, but at this point, I have seen bards fare quite well with 0 ART who focused more on maximizing HP & stats and leaving EQ slots available for optimum protection.
Yes, and there are plenty of swashbucklers who do well using falchions, and there are plenty of players who do quite well as a giant warrior, and there are plenty of casters who do quite well as half-elves. That doesn't mean that tactically this is the best option - and the question asked above was: which tactically is the best option.
If the question above were: Will my character be completely useless if I do not max art? Obviously not. Stats have minimal impact on the game compared to tactics. However, the obvious decision here is to say, just like maxing charisma is a necessity for a bard - so is maxing art.
If you have barely any experience playing a bard and have never even GM'd one, why bother giving player killing/tactical advise to someone on them? It doesn't make sense to me. You're obviously giving them information that you don't know for sure/is probably wrong.
You turn this thread into a discussion of 'ethical conduct', 'rule violations' and ones ability to roleplay instead of discussing the actual issue - player killing. Try sticking to the subject of the thread.
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
