Shattered Kingdoms

Achernar, 50+ or even 60 with 20 in each of those categories...

Well, even with the randomness, I've read people bragging about 120 enchants and not having a single MR enchant. Imagine how long that took. For that to be cut in half, I see where mund is coming from.

I'm trying to mitigate the fact that some kind of spell or skill type enchant would be made available to every class. Even if enchanting were left on only the two classes, I'd be happy to see enchanting have less of a cost. Limiting the number of enchantments actually makes the choice a tactical one. Do I spread it out among MP/fort/will/reflex equally? Do I do half MP then split the other three?

All warriors would do great mp on each armor piece, then try to stack fort/will on the jewelry pieces.

I don't see tactics in that.

Reflex is a useless save. Unless you're a non-sorc deep-elf or non-paladin elf.

Enchant does need to be tweaked though. I don't expect to be anywhere near as well as enchanted on my newb, as I was on Ealuriel.

pretty much, except for maybe prince.

Also useful for some Centaurs, maybe?


redundancy newb is redundant

I don't know where 'enchanting makes people quit' comes from. If it makes people quit, people don't understand the art/enchantment system if they feel the need to have 120 enchants and want to quit if they don't get it.

I'm on a fence about what Achernar said. I both agree and disagree. It's a matter of finding the right balance between time sinks and making sure everyone's aware this is a game and keeping it from feeling terribly grinding. It's a hard balance to find and sometimes suggestions like this, and others, need to be made to keep trying to move closer to that balance.

Some MUDS very successfully hand a lot of basic spells (create food, water, armor, shield, etc) to people. I don't like that idea. I don't think some things everyone should have...I just think this change wouldn't even improve or be a detriment to the accessibility of enchant armor. Look at what Achernar said - every tribunal has enchant armor. It doesn't affect accessibility at all. It's readily accessible and no one should have a problem getting it done, the problem is that if someone that is already a caster wants to take care of this sort of stuff themselves, without dragging someone else into it, and make themselves a bit more self sufficient - and please, keep in mind the argument of interaction seems bogus...if all you're interacting for is enchant armor and weapon, you fail...and if that's not all you're interacting for, then it's a moot argument in the first place - I am for it.



I would much rather take care of things myself if I'm a caster. I'm not even asking for everyone to get it. Just spread it to the casters.

And as a response to jhorleb and baldric: I have to disagree with you. The other side of the coin you're offering is to rebalance every debilitating spell in the game - which would mean far more spells than just 3, in order to bring things into balance. I just don't see that as feasible. The balance is delicate, but good, as it is imho (with exception ONLY to charm person). Perhaps in a perfect world we could talk Dulrik into that and it'd be done within 6 years (bards, anyone) - but it's just not really possible. That, and the fact the enchanting and the save system right now really is pretty awesome in the meat and potatoes of it. It's just a matter of, with our count, spreading love around.

I've dabbled with several characters now, and each time I play a class that cannot enchant I invariably end up standing next to a sleeping enchanter for several hours while they regain mana because I think it is impolite to make them enchant for me while I go do other things. More importantly, we just spent hours not roleplaying, PKing, or exploring.

Another poster mentioned how much fun they had enchanting armor for five hours one night. That's great if they enjoyed the experience, but I cannot imagine that most people have that much time in the day to blow on games. More importantly, they just spent five hours not roleplaying, PKing, or exploring.

If you are not roleplaying, PKing, or exploring, then what the hell is the point?

Really, we're just saying you need to nerf 2 to 4 spells. It's very easy to see what the consequences of such a change would be.

Other people are suggesting various ways of -entirely- changing the enchant system. The impacts on game-balance would be far-reaching and largely unpredictable.

While your proposal would be more convenient for a lot people, it will definitely have an effect on game-balance. I can only get behind such a change when it is argued, successfully, that it is for the better, as opposed to simply ignored.

I call BS. Unless you're discounting "that" tribunal.

Yeah, either that or we have some NPCs I don't know about.

The question is what balance is affected? It's already been argued that enchant is already accessible, readily, to most everyone. Tribunals have it built in. The only balancing points that have been argued, are arguing against certain classes being able to even have enchanted gear...not questioning that they should have the ability or not to be able to enchant their own gear. Like necromancers - the only argument stated against them is that them having a full kit of MR is overpowered. Being able to make it or having someone else make it seems completely irrelevant to the point made. What is the real, tangible effect on game balance? It has not been brought up yet, other than arguing against classes having enchanted armor at all, not the ability to save other people trouble.

I would be glad to consider and try to argue the counter-point of balance affects, but I don't think they've been appropriately put forth. I don't mean that to be smug or anything, I'm being honest - the affect on balance has only been argued against people having enchanted armor at all, not spreading the spell to others.

What spells would need to be balanced? Charm person, magma spray, petrification, finger of death, bolt of glory. Then you have to look at other kinda twinked game-winners - like frenzy resist from a gray aura not in your group. In fact, a lot of spells are "I win" if not resisted - call of lightning does 20% a full cast to an MP'd out rogue. Fireball, fully arted out, can destroy a room in only a handful of casts. From those spells, what would you do to balance the game to compensate for those spells being limited in power, and easier to resist?

Are people seriously considering wimping a bunch of spells only because they are game winners? That seems completely irrelevant to the point at hand, to be honest, enchant system or not. No one will ever need 120 enchants to survive those. A rather mediocre enchanted kit (one +greater and one +mod on all eq) will give you a great chance at surviving a fight long enough to take those spellcasters out. No one needs immunity, nor should have it. I think a lot of the opposition to this stems from a misunderstanding of saves and enchanting. I don't mean to be dismissive or rude when I say that - it's an honest assessment, so please don't take it as an insult to intelligence.

Game winners need to be in the game, otherwise it's all just a gimp fight. I think the spell balance, other than charm person, is perfectly fine, as are the spells' resistability. What of all the spells you brought up aren't readily resisted besides charm person?