Shattered Kingdoms

A topic to discuss various ideas proposed by players, without adding to the bulk of the original.

I really don't like the buffing/extreme nerfing ideas of pets. It has the potential to make scouts really OPed or really worthless. I don't think the current pets are particularly OPed, but that's just me. Why does it bother people that lions sneak? It's nice for rogues, whose sneak command would be otherwise worthless with a pet.

I think all pets should be mentor/expert level or lower, but giving it one special skill like sneak or the ones that are immune to magic don't really bother me.

I don't have an issue with pets as long as the AC bug is gone.

One of the best ideas was to be able to see your AC and saves.

qft

They were referring to store bought pets that everyone uses (I hope).

Since this is a discussion thread I guess I'll go ahead and discuss. I'd be excited to see races in general reassessed and a few in particular. I think elves could really use a bone (their maxable stats at creation flat out suck compared to every other race. I beg anyone to convince me otherwise), I think minotaurs could use some help (maybe that's just needing to be able to wear helmets), I think griffons could gain some equipment slots without breaking the game, and I think half-elves could use 1 more int (aka, a helf sorcerer would be equivalent to an elf sorcerer at present, except with better wis, making it playable at least).

I think seeing AC and saves is a great idea.

I also really agree with Sakhul that some weapon subtypes need to be re-examined particularly in light of how they interact with the barbarian's fury. Bandalores in particular, as already noted, seem particularly silly.

Making charm person not work on PC's just makes a whole lot of sense to me. Really, the issue with insta kill affects is that they serve to drive new players away. Since anyone "worth killing" will be enchanted and smart enough to avoid such attacks, it seems like the only logical purpose they serve is to instagib people trying to feel the pk scene out, which doesn't quite seem right.

I also suggested adding a lot of numbers back to the "attributes" and "scores" tabs. I feel that the lack of global channels, the greet system, the availability of imms to curse people, and other incentives already programmed provide the basis for a good RP environment. The fact is, nearly anyone I know who I'd introduce to the mud would say "wtf, why can't I see how much str I have" and quit at creation. I'm not saying this is a great attitude for them to take, but I think it's a prevalent one, and I don't believe at this point that adding numbers back would detract from the RP environment more than adding players back would add to it.

Races need some work but they're good for the most part. Helf sorcs suck, minotaurs aren't playable except as barbarians, I never see any elves, and everyone knows griffons are completely unreliable.

Bandalores are too accurate, I think. If you reduced that accuracy to, I dunno, maybe the level of a battlespear, you'd have a much more reasonable weapon.

Personally, I'd like to see numbers implemented in stats without removing the levels we have right now. STR: Powerful (16) would be reasonable--I mean, we already do that with levels.

Nobody likes my idea of charm person backfiring sometimes (very rarely) and causing the target to have the caster charmed but I think that would be a hoot, make the spell's use less prevalent, and create even more interesting roleplay around the spell. I kinda don't want to see it taken out, but maybe I'm wrong.

I think your numbers argument makes a lot of sense. I like things the way they are, but if we are losing players because of this, that's not good.

Yes. I think that since tame is a unique scout ability, what they tame should be (much) better than what everyone else gets.

And as for rogues sneaking about, you can't really sneak about with a giant horse anyway. If you want to be sneaky, you have to go about it yourself. Leave the horse as a decoy or something and then come back for it.

Anyways, my two cents.