Shattered Kingdoms

Bards definitely have some challenges. They were the last class implemented, and even 15(+?) years in, they've been one of the really difficult classes to balance. Some abilities when applied to a single character is perfectly reasonable, but then once applied to a whole group or a whole room, can suddenly become devastating. Or similarly waver between useless/helpful. The same can be said for pairing up bards. A single bard singing songs of healing isn't very effective (less so than a warlock casting healing rays, tho the mana regen while dancing can be very helpful), but if you've ever teamed up with another bard, a bard duo singing songs of healing can be extremely useful. Once a friend and I played a pair of bards and we leveled up like mad by singing together and almost never had to stop and rest because we never ran out of HP and never ran out of mana. The only thing that slowed us down was the PE drain. Persuade can be used to do just about anything, if the target is susceptible to the persuasion, but the analysis of the drawbacks is on point. And you're also on-point about the dancing bard. It enhances their power greatly, but it's always bugged me that they can't dirt-kick, trip, kick, walk around, etc, while dancing. I can dance out of a room, and I've seen plenty of dancers throw a high-kick into their routine, so these limitations seem counter-intuitive to me. If anything, it seems like they should dirt-kick, trip, kick, etc, BETTER while dancing, because they're already in their groove with momentum. And the lag associated with dance is frustrating as heck. I remember when it was implemented and mechanically it made sense (you used to be able to spam dance while singing songs of death, etc, to cause it to fire countless times over), but the implementation has been frustrating. Maybe it's more logical for "dance" to be a "stance" (like wolverine, etc), than for it to be a skill.

The "encroachment" I refer to is in terms of economy. You know, the whole "if everybody is special, then nobody is special" kind of thing. Persuade is supposed to be one of their top tier skills, but if any tribunal member of any class has access to the same range of buffs that are theoretically the benefit of one of the bard's top tier skills, then that "cheapens" the bard's skill. Taking it down the line, the same can be argued about priests and shamans. When tribunal casting was a thing, you virtually never saw a tribunal member walking around without permanent bless + armor + lighten load + etc. This is not to argue against your request, but rather just pointing out some of the balance considerations that Dulrik has to think about when making these decisions. Even little decisions can have ripple effects that spread wide and far, and that can stack in unexpected ways (necros with their animated undead can be similarly impactful... every tweak affecting a single undead can quickly spiral out of control with a full party of animated dead). Also to consider, those casts are generally a lot more useful to the warrior classes than the spell-casters who have greater and generally easy access to all these things, via direct casting, scrolls, staves, and/or wands.

It's worth noting, of course, that tribunal membership seemed much more enviable when tribunal casting was available, and other benefits added since their removal (tribunal rez, tribunal outfit, etc), haven't changed that. Personally, I'm rather neutral on the whole matter, except from the perspective that I love tribunals and want to see them as a desirable thing to hold membership in, and I love bards and want them to be desirable too. The arguments y'all have presented here in support of your position has definitely persuaded me ( ) but I have no idea if there's any possibility of it ever being changed back again, but I doubt it. However, that's not to say that a third-rail option is not more likely. Dulrik is usually pretty measured and reasoned in what he implements & codes, and is VERY hard pressed to outright reverse things, but is much more likely to consider alternative options that might achieve a similar desired result. Your "one main caster" concept that exists apart from the "tribunal casting" debate may be a logical pursuit to convince him, something that's generally localized, equivalent across the kingdoms, provides a central target that an enemy can strike against to de-buff defenders, and can be generally limited & constrained apart from wily builders who frequently like to create sneaky little easter eggs that can slip in under the balance-check constraints.

I can see where you are coming from. I always felt that bards still had the slight edge though in that a non-tribunal bard could still go to terons temple and get buffs while the other players had to sign up for pvp to obtain them. Not trying to derail and this is a serious question. Is being less inclined to reverse things an issue because it interferes with code? I've never understood the exact reasoning especially if it is a change that makes the game more fun for players.

Hmm, I don't know. My comment was more an observation from my years of working with D than of anything he's ever specifically said, and I've had a lot more success influencing Dulrik when I request a "patch" than when I've requested a "reversal" (come to think of it, the same is true with most bosses I've had in the workplace too). Most code decisions made in SK have been collaborative and purposeful, and that may have something to do with it.

Maybe it's like squeezing toothpaste- you need toothpaste to brush your teeth, but then you accidentally have too much after the squeeze; maybe it's too hard to put the toothpaste back into the tube so instead it's preferable to apply the extra as a silver polish to that silverware in the kitchen. Junking it or putting it back in the tube may be the first "fix" to come to mind, but the second "fix" finds a way to address the second problem (too much toothpaste) without re-introducing the original problem (no toothpaste?). It's imperfect, but I think illustrates the theory.

Breaking from the toothpaste analogy, I suspect the difficulty for reversing code may compound over time, as new code is written in and they all layer upon each other. This is just theory, of course. Personally, I dropped computer science in year 2 of college, so my grasp of the coding process isn't the strongest. But as an architectural designer, I know there will be flaws in EVERY design; you can't always go back to redesign a system from scratch, and there are often different ways to achieve the same desired effect. You can implement change orders during construction to address problems encountered in the field, you can design additions and upgrades, but it's generally more expensive and time consuming to un-build something without damaging the surrounding infrastructure, than to design a "fix" to the problem discovered post-construction.

Applying the logic to this case, ordering NPCs to cast is less the actual desired effect, than is access to these low/mid-level buffs to make PCs more competitive in certain situations, especially with a smaller playerbase to draw upon, and hence why a different patch/change order may offer an effective solution.

I do admit, bards can be OP in a full partied group. I remember when playing with one of the first few bards, Barith, he became extremely devastating in a PVP environment.

To add onto bards being special, we could focus more on the bard's personal characteristics that makes them different rather than their party-oriented songs. This might go against the original intent of bards where they are entertainers allowing them to show their true potential in a group environment. Because the whole point of bards in the past has always been the songs, but I think that should be secondary to the bard's needs (sorta like how healing ray is to warlocks). Bard's livelihood should come first that serves their own personal interest and comfort. In that way we can focus more on personal utility to make them more fun to play as a class. Bards should never be able to cast buffs on "another" player! Period! The tradeoff would be allowing them to get access to more spells like gate or heal for their personal usage. We would probably have to balance it with ME/PE/delay because having the same ME/PE/delay for all spells is silly because asking someone to cast lighten load on the bard should be an easier task compared to gate because it takes less concentration. Also the ME requirement should be more than the casted amount of mana.

In terms of implementation, Bards can initially learn persuade that allows them to cast the most basic spells on items and themselves. Advanced persuade would give them access to gate, recharge, give(NPC), take (NPC), and other second-tier spells. Bards should never have access to top-tier spells like ressurect, final strike, etc... (or maybe have a 10% chance of persuading someone to ressurect) I can imagine a bard talking up a young sorcess for a gate/armor for himself but not for other people because thats a little awkward. Its like trying to convince two people to talk to each other when they have no interest in talking to each other. And maybe remove person getting angry and attacking the bard on failed persuade so bards can use persuade anywhere without getting in trouble with the law. Making them more independent would make them more appealing like any other class. Also multiple bards amplifying each other's song might be too OP, but that definitely needs to be removed. To give them more value in a party, give them fourth attack.

My opinion of bards is that the thought behind bards were overly ambitious and way too impactful to the game and were focused too much on party attribute rather than personal attributes. For example, bards have lore/persuade... warlocks have magma/healing ray... hellion have hellfire/cleave... sorcs have charm/acid/final strike... priest have ress/heal... shaman have spirit aura/heal...mercs have retreat/tank/hp... swashi have taunt/dual wield/stance. Each class have key spells that differentiates them from one another but also serves their own personal interest, but the current lore/persuade does not. Lore is sorta just like advanced identify and persuade has been nerfed too much to barely even use it on self, and tumble is just to run away.

I'm pretty neutral on bards too because I'll never play them, but I really like talking about them in terms of their flaws and ways to make them better but also talking about the possibility of changing their current implementation/design concept. And of course the odds of getting these changes is very low because of SK's current circumstances and its very understandable that it will never come to fruition. But I really like understanding the thought-process that went behind bards and casually talking about their flaws/benefits.

can we just do... something? I'm sad. I'm just sad. Trag shouldn't have encountered a bug that lost him loot THREE TIMES. He should have been reloaded; no one is fighting over that loot. The people should be allowed second chances. I don't want the game to die.

Sorry jennbo. I tried my best. I offered to come back to play and get all his loot. Only so much a player can do. Its 100% an IMM related issue.

He seems adamant about not playing for reasons. The ball is in the IMMs court to reach out to him. If they are willing, reinstate his characters and give him back his loot. And of course fix the bug that wipes out loot because it destroys morale of progression and accomplishment. Its extremely demoralizing when you spend 10+ hours on loot or wait for months on end for an item to be available only to have it wiped out. It's almost as if the game doesnt save.

So... do we have any status update on these “qualityof life” changes?
Donwe have code in development? Code that’s being tested? Or are these still just nice things to have one day, stuck as ideas?

Can we open cabal access so alts can join cabals as well? The pbase is so low that everyone pretty much knows everyone

That's a no from me dawg

More loyalty tokens.