-----------------

poster: Lameass
subject: HOB
date: Fri Mar 30 20:08:20 2001



-----------------

poster: Bloodlust
subject: HOB
date: Tue Apr  3 04:26:30 2001

is HOB power still based on the difference between the caster and
monster. or is it just a burst of energy at a set strength?

-----------------

poster: Khosan
subject: >HOB
date: Tue Apr  3 16:20:05 2001

On Tue Apr  3 04:26:30 2001 Bloodlust wrote post #2:
> is HOB power still based on the difference between the caster and
> monster. or is it just a burst of energy at a set strength?

No, it is just a plain normal blasting spell now.

Khosan

-----------------

poster: Davaris
subject: HOB
date: Wed Apr  4 23:11:07 2001

if HOB is just a normal blasting spell now, it's not really
balancing anything, is it?
since hob sucks so much now, could you try and make aol a bit better
or something?
you wouldn't have to make it stronger, but it takes too damn long to
cast. i'm dead before i finish chanting!
anywho, that's just my opinion, but no one's probably gonna listen
to me, being ignored perhaps even more than basketball
Davaris

-----------------

poster: Wagro
subject: >HOB
date: Wed Apr  4 23:13:32 2001

ok, when will you get the hint? hob is not supposed to be good for a
healer alpha. it supposed to suck, wanna be good at blasting, become
a mage, quit whining about hob, and live with it, this was over a
long time ago, its not gonna be changed, deal with it

-----------------

poster: Tranquil
subject: >HOB
date: Thu Apr  5 03:48:32 2001

On Wed Apr  4 23:11:07 2001 Davaris wrote post #4:
> if HOB is just a normal blasting spell now, it's not really
> balancing anything, is it?
> since hob sucks so much now, could you try and make aol a bit better
> or something?
> you wouldn't have to make it stronger, but it takes too damn long to
> cast. i'm dead before i finish chanting!
> anywho, that's just my opinion, but no one's probably gonna listen
> to me, being ignored perhaps even more than basketball
> Davaris

How about you try the spell before saying it sucks. I tested it on
my secondary two days ago and was quite impressed by the offensive
power of it, considering it is after all a lvl 2 spell. Also, some
wiz might want to look at the power of that spell, seeing as my
little level 4 cleric can solo probably about 2/3 - 3/4 the rate he
could before, which to me still seems to high, even for a 4m
player.

- Tranquil


-----------------

poster: Pedron
subject: >HOB
date: Thu Apr  5 04:22:49 2001

On Wed Apr  4 23:11:07 2001 Davaris wrote post #4:
> if HOB is just a normal blasting spell now, it's not really
> balancing anything, is it?
> since hob sucks so much now, could you try and make aol a bit better
> or something?
> you wouldn't have to make it stronger, but it takes too damn long to
> cast. i'm dead before i finish chanting!
> anywho, that's just my opinion, but no one's probably gonna listen
> to me, being ignored perhaps even more than basketball
> Davaris
You're probably fighting monsters too big for you, but hob looks like 
you could still blast those guys, step out, heal real fast, leap in 
and blast some more to peck em to death.  Even though it's been tuned 
and it supposedly sucks, it's a 1-round alpha healer's blasting spell.
If aol takes too long, buy some better armors or fight 
smalelr monsters.  If you want to bother with bigger guys, 
hob would look like the weapon of choice. ;>

-pedron's secondary used to beat on crap too 
big with the 6-round burning hands before it was removed. :)

-----------------

poster: Sleet
subject: >HOB
date: Thu Apr  5 05:11:01 2001

On Wed Apr  4 23:11:07 2001 Davaris wrote post #4:
> if HOB is just a normal blasting spell now, it's not really
> balancing anything, is it?
> since hob sucks so much now, could you try and make aol a bit better
> or something?
> you wouldn't have to make it stronger, but it takes too damn long to
> cast. i'm dead before i finish chanting!
> anywho, that's just my opinion, but no one's probably gonna listen
> to me, being ignored perhaps even more than basketball
> Davaris
you proably shouldnt be killing things that big then

-----------------

poster: Einar
subject: >HOB
date: Thu Apr  5 05:15:18 2001

On Wed Apr  4 23:11:07 2001 Davaris wrote post #4:
> if HOB is just a normal blasting spell now, it's not really
> balancing anything, is it?
> since hob sucks so much now, could you try and make aol a bit better
> or something?
> you wouldn't have to make it stronger, but it takes too damn long to
> cast. i'm dead before i finish chanting!
> anywho, that's just my opinion, but no one's probably gonna listen
> to me, being ignored perhaps even more than basketball
> Davaris
Even though I think little clerics should not be able to solo very
good, AOL does take a bit long
It would be ALOT more useful if it was even 3 rounds
HOB would be good, lvl 2 and 1 round sound great, but chaining hob
the whole fight, running out to heal and running in to chain and
finish is pretty tappy
I don't think HOB is worth it though, but AOL seems pretty cool, if
only they cut a round out of casting time

-----------------

poster: Davaris
subject: HOB
date: Thu Apr  5 05:16:42 2001

i don't really think 1k monsies are too big for me, which is what i
usually solo
i used to be able to gold miners on hyboria relitively quickly, now
i'm lucky if kill one before i run away
oh well. i guess no one's listening to me, as i predicted
well, i'm assuming that you'd all like to keep bitching at me now,
so i'll shut up

-Davaris

-----------------

poster: Arkangyle
subject: HOB / casting time
date: Thu Apr  5 06:46:25 2001

  You want arrow of light to be at least reduced to 3 rounds?  Maybe
you should try "help " and take note that ALL the
rest of us have 4 rounds spells too.  Get used to it.

-----------------

poster: Myrddin
subject: >HOB / casting time
date: Thu Apr  5 06:47:29 2001

On Thu Apr  5 06:46:25 2001 Arkangyle wrote post #11:
>   You want arrow of light to be at least reduced to 3 rounds?  Maybe
> you should try "help " and take note that ALL the
> rest of us have 4 rounds spells too.  Get used to it.
highlevelspells also have this neat thing called quick chant, not
that i disagree with you

-----------------

poster: Sigwald
subject: >HOB / casting time
date: Thu Apr  5 11:17:29 2001

On Thu Apr  5 06:46:25 2001 Arkangyle wrote post #11:
>   You want arrow of light to be at least reduced to 3 rounds?  Maybe
> you should try "help " and take note that ALL the
> rest of us have 4 rounds spells too.  Get used to it.
Not to mention that reducing it to 3 rounds would also reduce the damage
it does :P

-----------------

poster: Wagro
subject: images of torture
date: Fri Apr 27 22:53:47 2001

Maybe it's supposed to be like this, but i think the images of
torture spell is a little messed up at the moment. It works fine,
but the spellcost is insane. Right now i have the spell maxxed at
100%, and its mastery at 70%. From as far as i can tell, it stuns
birds for at most 2 rounds, and is lucky to stun an eq monster for
over a round.  The spellcost for it is around 320 sps, which is
insane for a simple stunning spell.
Witches can use the nightmare of medusa spell which stuns for a much
longer time than images and costs under a third of the sps. This
also does not mention the fact that images has a chance to forget
the caster for 30 seconds to a minute, where medusa has no risk.
The way most non-sac eq parties work, is the harmer stuns the
monster until it is almost in range of deathing. There are very few,
if any harmers right now that have the regen for more then 2-3
spells per tock, so they get to stun for entry hits, then idle for
the remainder of the tick.
It would be very helpful if image's damage and spellcost was lowered
significantly, while the stunning chance and length get upped some.
This would let us get more then 1-2 spells a tick
which has a very decent chance to forget us, or be resisted anyway.

-----------------

poster: Myrddin
subject: >images of torture
date: Fri Apr 27 22:55:09 2001

medusa stuns the caster if failed

-----------------

poster: Wagro
subject: >>images of torture
date: Fri Apr 27 22:56:48 2001

Ok, so it does have a drawback, but im sure this stun will lastonly
a few seconds, where the harmer is compleatly useless for at least
another tick.

-----------------

poster: Myrddin
subject: >>>images of torture
date: Fri Apr 27 23:01:41 2001

actualy many witchs have died as a result of this, ie the party
flees but the witch is still stunned, i have seen it last 5-6 rounds
before on myself and others

-----------------

poster: Wagro
subject: >>>>images of torture
date: Fri Apr 27 23:05:38 2001

So apparently there are drawbacks to medusa. But the point of my
post was not to compare drawbacks, i wanted to simply bring the
spellcost and stunning ability of it forward, so if it appears that
my post appeared to make witches seem too good, disregard that
part.

-----------------

poster: Golte
subject: >images of torture
date: Sat Apr 28 00:11:44 2001

Personally i dislike the theme of keeping big eq monsters stunned, 
so it's rather fair if you cant chain cast it without getting tapped 
alot faster than the blasters. 
If it's the case that all big monsters can be tanked with a stunner, 
but cant be tanked without a stunner, then it's about time to lower 
stun effect and lower monster hits/spells. 
Harmers got harm body, blood spray, peel flesh and magical brand 
which i think should be their main eq spells.


-----------------

poster: Jomo
subject: Updated Tick Trigs for Dummies (portal)
date: Sat Jun 23 00:43:52 2001

Ok.. fixed the tick trigs thing, and believe it or not bad it 
better!
(Well.. kind of.) Improvements over the last release:
o The "Missed Trigs" Portion actually works
o I remembered to include the ever important ! before each trigger command..
very important for posts..

Well Have a good afternoon..

-----------------

poster: Killaaz
subject: spray holy water
date: Sun Sep 16 03:36:41 2001

This spell need to be looked over. tried it out today..after
10spells my urn was empty and thats about ~1 sidhe..needed to refill
my urn ~600sps thats about 1600sps for 1 kill whick i can blast away
with turn undead with ~1ksps or less
Would like to see either the amounts of water use/spell lowered or
the "create holy water" spell spamount lowered..
//Killaaz

-----------------

poster: Zyz
subject: templar
date: Wed Oct 10 03:52:39 2001

I think an attack skill or two would make sense in this guild, so
that holy warriors could 'smite' or 'bash' evil things. These
offensive skills could (would) be fairly ineffective when compared
to attack spells, but I think would be thematic and perhaps fun to
fool around with. -Zyz

-----------------

poster: Tranquil
subject: >templar
date: Wed Oct 10 04:35:03 2001

On Wed Oct 10 03:52:39 2001 Zyz wrote post #22:
> I think an attack skill or two would make sense in this guild, so
> that holy warriors could 'smite' or 'bash' evil things. These
> offensive skills could (would) be fairly ineffective when compared
> to attack spells, but I think would be thematic and perhaps fun to
> fool around with. -Zyz

More suitable would be the removal of this guild from the healer
tree (after all, theyre healers, not warriors), and an entire new
guild tree written, starting with a new beta. Preferably something
that doesnt have slashing (as warriors and priests of holy faith
are, in most instances, not allowed to shed blood) skills, but
concentrates on holy shielding and blunt weaponry

I have something rattling around in my brain that would be a small
start to this idea but atm have other coding concerns. Eventuaklly
though if someone hasnt already done so, I will begin work on a
guild such as this if possible

- Tranquil is bored of xp and wants 10k back up again


-----------------

poster: Spiraldancer
subject: >>templar
date: Wed Oct 10 12:36:47 2001

I disagree with Tranquil. I know I am not high enough worth to
actually be in the guild yet but it seems that Templar is the
paladin of the cleric tree. Normally paladins use swords (Holy
Avengers if they are lucky =P). If you want clerical bashing be a
normal healer and buy up attack/blunt. I can't comment on the attack
skills (or lack thereof) in the guild but I just wanted to comment
on the guild placement.

-Spiralposter

-----------------

poster: Tranquil
subject: >>>templar
date: Wed Oct 10 21:40:33 2001

On Wed Oct 10 12:36:47 2001 Spiraldancer wrote post #24:
> I disagree with Tranquil. I know I am not high enough worth to
> actually be in the guild yet but it seems that Templar is the
> paladin of the cleric tree. Normally paladins use swords (Holy
> Avengers if they are lucky =P). If you want clerical bashing be a
> normal healer and buy up attack/blunt. I can't comment on the attack
> skills (or lack thereof) in the guild but I just wanted to comment
> on the guild placement.
> 
> -Spiralposter

At this, I would like to point out that the popularity of Paladin as
'a holy warrior that uses swords' has come entirely from the
Dragonlance novels (at least I have never seen it anywhere else). In
addition to this, a Paladin isn't a Cleric, he is a warrior that
chooses to follow the good faith.

A Cleric is a priest. Not just someone who follows the good faith,
but someone who lives the teachings and who is supposed to set an
example to those who worship the god in question, but dont actually
live the same devout life. to 'spill blood', has always been against
a good priests divine law (although they have always been allowed to
break heads with a hammer or some such =j ).

Another point that I would like to mention is the serious lack of
weapon using guilds that dont use a sword as its main weapon type.
Before anyone goes mentioning fighter, we all know that fighter has
all wtypes but the plain fact is, fighter sucks for anything but
tanking due to the fact that phys damage resistances are through the
roof on most mobs, and most people choose to use swords anyway,
since the other wtypes are seriously lacking in available
equipment.

After those points have been mentioned, I believe that even if the
weaver tree is left as it is, templar will be almost nothing but a
few more glvls to take in the guild tree due to the fact it is meant
to be a healing guild, not a damage one. Woodsman is probably the
closest thing to a holy warrior that exists and is actually usable,
which may or may not be a problem, but in my opinion, some more
diversity in guilds would not be a bad thing.

- Tranquil


-----------------

poster: Uno
subject: >>>>>templar
date: Wed Oct 10 21:42:52 2001

On Wed Oct 10 21:42:37 2001 Uno wrote post #26:
> On Wed Oct 10 21:40:33 2001 Tranquil wrote post #25:
> > On Wed Oct 10 12:36:47 2001 Spiraldancer wrote post #24:
> > > I disagree with Tranquil. I know I am not high enough worth to
> > > actually be in the guild yet but it seems that Templar is the
> > > paladin of the cleric tree. Normally paladins use swords (Holy
> > > Avengers if they are lucky =P). If you want clerical bashing be a
> > > normal healer and buy up attack/blunt. I can't comment on the attack
> > > skills (or lack thereof) in the guild but I just wanted to comment
> > > on the guild placement.
> > > 
> > > -Spiralposter
> > 
> > At this, I would like to point out that the popularity of Paladin as
> > 'a holy warrior that uses swords' has come entirely from the
> > Dragonlance novels (at least I have never seen it anywhere else). In
> > addition to this, a Paladin isn't a Cleric, he is a warrior that
> > chooses to follow the good faith.
> > 
> > A Cleric is a priest. Not just someone who follows the good faith,
> > but someone who lives the teachings and who is supposed to set an
> > example to those who worship the god in question, but dont actually
> > live the same devout life. to 'spill blood', has always been against
> > a good priests divine law (although they have always been allowed to
> > break heads with a hammer or some such =j ).
> > 
> > Another point that I would like to mention is the serious lack of
> > weapon using guilds that dont use a sword as its main weapon type.
> > Before anyone goes mentioning fighter, we all know that fighter has
> > all wtypes but the plain fact is, fighter sucks for anything but
> > tanking due to the fact that phys damage resistances are through the
> > roof on most mobs, and most people choose to use swords anyway,
> > since the other wtypes are seriously lacking in available
> > equipment.
> > 
> > After those points have been mentioned, I believe that even if the
> > weaver tree is left as it is, templar will be almost nothing but a
> > few more glvls to take in the guild tree due to the fact it is meant
> > to be a healing guild, not a damage one. Woodsman is probably the
> > closest thing to a holy warrior that exists and is actually usable,
> > which may or may not be a problem, but in my opinion, some more
> > diversity in guilds would not be a bad thing.
> > 
> > - Tranquil
> > 
> didn't 2nd edition DND precede dragonlance?
err, first edition

-----------------

poster: Spiraldancer
subject: >>>>>>templar
date: Wed Oct 10 23:31:55 2001

Tranq, Paladins are a staple of the D&D universe. They have been
around much longer than Dragonlance novels. =P
So if Paladin (Templar) shoudldn't be in cleric, and animist are
ranger/druids where do you put Paladins at? It still seems to me
that cleric tree is the best place for them.
Enough from me now. =)

-Spiralreposter

-----------------

poster: Tranquil
subject: >>>>>>>templar
date: Wed Oct 10 23:47:57 2001

On Wed Oct 10 23:31:55 2001 Spiraldancer wrote post #28:
> Tranq, Paladins are a staple of the D&D universe. They have been
> around much longer than Dragonlance novels. =P
> So if Paladin (Templar) shoudldn't be in cleric, and animist are
> ranger/druids where do you put Paladins at? It still seems to me
> that cleric tree is the best place for them.
> Enough from me now. =)
> 
> -Spiralreposter

1) It has been pointed out to me that DnD have had sword using holy
warriors, and that is fine, but I have not read DnD. The other thing
I'd like to note is that, since I haven't read DnD, I also wont be
able to comment on what kind of beliefs and reasons that these 'holy
warriors' have for shedding blood, etc.

2) Animist does not have ranger. It has woodsman which is far from
what a ranger would be, a bow/arrow and/or knife wielding person who
doesnt use spells. I have heard a rumor that the idea for woodsman
was actually taken straight from a book somewhere, but again this I
do not know for sure. It also has druid but imo the entire guild
tree is stuffed and needs a total rehash (no, that doesnt mean it
sucks and yes I do enjoy woodsman, but it doesnt feel 'right').

3) I already stated in my last post that templar should stay under
the cleric tree. My point was that it doesnt belong under the
-weaver- tree. In my opinion there should be a third beta coded for
the cleric alpha, specifically for the idea of holy fighters,
something that will give the player enough of the correct stats to
make use of the skills/spells contained within. I actually have an
original semi-layout done for a guild that would be similar to this
but before it could work here at RD the entire guild system would
need an overhaul (not going to happen).

- Tranquil


-----------------

poster: Arkangyle
subject: >>>>templar
date: Thu Oct 11 02:21:52 2001

I'll give you one point ... Paladins being restricted to slashing
weapons and swords IS very erroneous.  As a knight of honor, the
paladin would most likely not engage in the use of any missile or
ranged weapons, but maces and other weapons you might commonly find
at a renaissance style tournie would definitely be fair game.

-----------------

poster: Wildchild
subject: >>>>>templar
date: Thu Oct 11 02:24:28 2001

On Thu Oct 11 02:21:52 2001 Arkangyle wrote post #30:
> I'll give you one point ... Paladins being restricted to slashing
> weapons and swords IS very erroneous.  As a knight of honor, the
> paladin would most likely not engage in the use of any missile or
> ranged weapons, but maces and other weapons you might commonly find
> at a renaissance style tournie would definitely be fair game.

Aye, maces, war hammers and the like would be common for sure.

Not that I want to say we should base our guilds on any specific
ideas, but as much as I've seen paladins in D&D use swords &
knightly armor along with clerical magic, I've seen many
worlds/settings that only allow their fighting clerics (sometimes
considered monks) only use non-bladed weapons.

-WC

-----------------

poster: Goroharahad
subject: >>>>>templar
date: Thu Oct 11 02:25:07 2001

On Thu Oct 11 02:21:52 2001 Arkangyle wrote post #30:
> I'll give you one point ... Paladins being restricted to slashing
> weapons and swords IS very erroneous.  As a knight of honor, the
> paladin would most likely not engage in the use of any missile or
> ranged weapons, but maces and other weapons you might commonly find
> at a renaissance style tournie would definitely be fair game.
I do not understand this point.
Templars existed, they were much more fighters than priests, not
even mentionning medics. They used weapons - swords/spears mostly
like all knight - and they did not feign to use them.

Goro

-----------------

poster: Arkangyle
subject: >>>>>>templar
date: Thu Oct 11 02:28:02 2001

On Thu Oct 11 02:25:07 2001 Goroharahad wrote post #32:
> On Thu Oct 11 02:21:52 2001 Arkangyle wrote post #30:
> > I'll give you one point ... Paladins being restricted to slashing
> > weapons and swords IS very erroneous.  As a knight of honor, the
> > paladin would most likely not engage in the use of any missile or
> > ranged weapons, but maces and other weapons you might commonly find
> > at a renaissance style tournie would definitely be fair game.
> I do not understand this point.
> Templars existed, they were much more fighters than priests, not
> even mentionning medics. They used weapons - swords/spears mostly
> like all knight - and they did not feign to use them.
> 
> Goro
You're belief that knights/templars etc all used swords and spears
is TOTALLY unfounded and untrue.  Blunt weapons, ESPECIALLY maces
were very commonly used by knights as they are extremely effective
in many instances compared to a slashing weapon that has a difficult
time cutting through thick armor.

-----------------

poster: Wildchild
subject: >>>>>>>templar
date: Thu Oct 11 02:30:03 2001

On Thu Oct 11 02:28:02 2001 Arkangyle wrote post #33:
> On Thu Oct 11 02:25:07 2001 Goroharahad wrote post #32:
> > On Thu Oct 11 02:21:52 2001 Arkangyle wrote post #30:
> > > I'll give you one point ... Paladins being restricted to slashing
> > > weapons and swords IS very erroneous.  As a knight of honor, the
> > > paladin would most likely not engage in the use of any missile or
> > > ranged weapons, but maces and other weapons you might commonly find
> > > at a renaissance style tournie would definitely be fair game.
> > I do not understand this point.
> > Templars existed, they were much more fighters than priests, not
> > even mentionning medics. They used weapons - swords/spears mostly
> > like all knight - and they did not feign to use them.
> > 
> > Goro
> You're belief that knights/templars etc all used swords and spears
> is TOTALLY unfounded and untrue.  Blunt weapons, ESPECIALLY maces
> were very commonly used by knights as they are extremely effective
> in many instances compared to a slashing weapon that has a difficult
> time cutting through thick armor.

]

Also note that up until a year or two ago, mages had weapon skill
piercing (them being limited to daggers seems to be common enough).
Clerics also had weapon skill blunt.

So there's precedence here anyways :)

-WC

-----------------

poster: Sleet
subject: >>>>>>>templar
date: Thu Oct 11 04:28:50 2001

On Wed Oct 10 23:31:55 2001 Spiraldancer wrote post #28:
> Tranq, Paladins are a staple of the D&D universe. They have been
> around much longer than Dragonlance novels. =P
> So if Paladin (Templar) shoudldn't be in cleric, and animist are
> ranger/druids where do you put Paladins at? It still seems to me
> that cleric tree is the best place for them.
> Enough from me now. =)
> 
> -Spiralreposter
paladins in fig guild maybe?

-----------------

poster: Trigon
subject: this templar stuffs
date: Thu Oct 11 04:54:06 2001

Who says we have to follow D&D rules that paladins gotta do this and
do that.  What fun would this mud be if it were just a mimic of
something else?
Why can't we say the templars in the game of Red Dragon can choose
to use a mace or a sword? I don't understand why people are being so
friggin argumentative over this. Shees
Trigon

-----------------

poster: Pedron
subject: >this templar stuffs
date: Thu Oct 11 13:10:53 2001

On Thu Oct 11 04:54:06 2001 Trigon wrote post #36:
> Who says we have to follow D&D rules that paladins gotta do this and
> do that.  What fun would this mud be if it were just a mimic of
> something else?
> Why can't we say the templars in the game of Red Dragon can choose
> to use a mace or a sword? I don't understand why people are being so
> friggin argumentative over this. Shees
> Trigon
I could see giving them weapon skill slashing high up and maybe even 
the strike skill, but it'd suck compared to various spells that do 
nonphys damage. (I think this whole line of discussion 
started with a request for extra attack skills in templar 
so they could look a little like warriors)

If you really wanna be a lawful warrior, go warrior and kill evil stuff- 
in keeping with the various D&D rules people are citing.  You all 
should roleplay to meet those rules or quit citing them. :)  My 
big nickel.

-pedron spam

-----------------

poster: Killaaz
subject: >>this templar stuffs
date: Thu Oct 11 13:52:53 2001

What i would like to see is the consecrate weapons skills give a
cool message or something...i have used em but they seem to help
very little if anything at all.

-----------------

poster: Hierokliff
subject: templars.
date: Thu Oct 11 13:56:00 2001

The problem aint that templar are clerics...
the problem is that they are healers...
a third guildtree in the clerics guild and
maybe a fourth for the evil side of unholy warriors
would rule...

Not so hard to come up with good ideas for these kind
of guilds, pretty sure ive alrd done it atleast one
time for both sides, but was told that RD dont want
guilds where they get 'everything'...but things have
changed...maybe its time for a dark and good side of
a warrior clerics instead of having healers running
around smashing the brains out of the poor evil creatures..

//Hiero

-----------------

poster: Warchief
subject: >templars.
date: Thu Oct 11 14:06:19 2001

On Thu Oct 11 13:56:00 2001 Hierokliff wrote post #39:
> The problem aint that templar are clerics...
> the problem is that they are healers...
> a third guildtree in the clerics guild and
> maybe a fourth for the evil side of unholy warriors
> would rule...
> 
> Not so hard to come up with good ideas for these kind
> of guilds, pretty sure ive alrd done it atleast one
> time for both sides, but was told that RD dont want
> guilds where they get 'everything'...but things have
> changed...maybe its time for a dark and good side of
> a warrior clerics instead of having healers running
> around smashing the brains out of the poor evil creatures..
> 
> //Hiero

I would have to agree on this.  I have wanted a paladin guild tree
here for a long time, and I might even be able to find the guildtree
ideas that I made up if anyone wishes to code one.  Dark warriors
would also be a nice addition.

-Chief

-----------------

poster: Kaos
subject: >>templars.
date: Thu Oct 11 15:27:23 2001

On Thu Oct 11 14:06:19 2001 Warchief wrote post #40:
> On Thu Oct 11 13:56:00 2001 Hierokliff wrote post #39:
> > The problem aint that templar are clerics...
> > the problem is that they are healers...
> > a third guildtree in the clerics guild and
> > maybe a fourth for the evil side of unholy warriors
> > would rule...
> > 
> > Not so hard to come up with good ideas for these kind
> > of guilds, pretty sure ive alrd done it atleast one
> > time for both sides, but was told that RD dont want
> > guilds where they get 'everything'...but things have
> > changed...maybe its time for a dark and good side of
> > a warrior clerics instead of having healers running
> > around smashing the brains out of the poor evil creatures..
> > 
> > //Hiero
> 
> I would have to agree on this.  I have wanted a paladin guild tree
> here for a long time, and I might even be able to find the guildtree
> ideas that I made up if anyone wishes to code one.  Dark warriors
> would also be a nice addition.
> 
> -Chief
I think there should be two new omicron guilds in the fig tree,
Paladins, and Deathknights. That way, people with more than 1G
xp could use that for something good, and not split into midbies.
Level 120 to max all three omicrons sounds nice. And of course,
being omicron guilds, it can be justified that warriors get
useful spells like, for instance a small healing spell in paladin,
and an attack spell in deathknight, + the usual goodies.
You caneasilly get that from joining new alphas at that level anyway,
so it's not like it would be way out of tune, it would just
be more in theme.

-----------------

poster: Tektor
subject: Templars
date: Thu Oct 11 21:23:21 2001

Anyone who compares RD to D&D should be shot. D&D is not the end all
of what races/guild are. Simply because it was done earlier does not
make them right. This is not a spin off of D&D if you don't like it
got play D&D. One thing people need to understand is that making new
guilds that keep in balance with the rest of the guilds can be
difficult, it takes alot of work. Templars is a 'small' bonus to the
cleric tree to make them a lil better due to their overall lack of
power. To have them be nothing but healers would make the guild
unbalanced to other guilds.

-----------------

poster: Nop
subject: >>>>templar
date: Thu Oct 11 23:15:16 2001

Personally, I have no opinion/useful input on the Templar thing,
since I'm far too lowbie.  But as to Paladins, the oldest
reference to a "Paladin" that I've been able to find is in
the ballads referring to the "Twelve Peers of Charlemagne," who
were alternately called "The Twelve Paladins."  Orlando (or
Roland, depending on which language you read about him in)
especially is referred to as a paladin, and one of them was
an Archbishop (The Archbishop Turpin.)  Orlando most definitely
was fond of swords, he even had a magic one, I think its name
was Durandal, but I may be confusing it with some video game
sword.  http://www.legends.dm.net/paladins/roland.html

-----------------

poster: Tranquil
subject: >Templars
date: Thu Oct 11 23:57:49 2001

> Templars is a 'small' bonus to the cleric tree to make them 
> a lil better due to their overall lack of power.

I would like to point out one thing. The weaver guild does not lack
for power. In fact, they are the most powerful, and only guild of
their kind that exists here at RD. Have a look at 'who guild weaver'
sometime, and even taking out all the 2nd class weavers, there are
still plenty of them on. Obviously the guild must be good for
something.

My point is this: healers are supposed to be exactly that - healers.
Fighters dont go casting spells, mages dont go healing people and,
in my opinion, healers shouldnt go beating people over the head and
expect any tangible result. This includes whether they try it with a
sword, a mace, or even a barrel of stew imo.

As it is they already get exorcist at bravo level which allows for
some usable solo capability. I was healer my last reinc with maxxed
white flame and 5% exorcism (mastery). Yea its a weak spell, but
what do you expect from a healing professional?

- Tranquil


-----------------

poster: Bloodlust
subject: Templars
date: Tue Oct 23 15:06:47 2001

 Speaking from a lowbie perspective, yes the weavers rock. we have
the easiest take in a party to just keep the meatwall healed. we
dont have to fight, so we check tick, and dont have to worry about
getting killed during lagstorms or from overzealous members. we just
sit back, watch the report, cast a spell, and vwaalah "Healed". but
thats when we are in a party.
 I know for a fact that cleric isnt the most powerful guild, granted
its one of the more popular now (too my disgust) but that makes it
hard for us at the low/midbie(highbie?) range. because i have
noticed that when i maxxed my healing spls at lv15 i got into lots
of parties. due to the fact my exp shares was low and i was
guaranteed to heal everytime i cast (95%). but now that im at lv 29
i cant find many parties i can get into. this may be due to the
popularity and abundance of weavers on at any given time, but i seem
to see most of them just standing around waiting for something good
to happen. you can find them casting food, removing scars, give est.
worths, dheals at random (my favorite), or the pentacle of it all
was the other day there were like 3-5 ppl doing prayer for mankind.
dont get me wrong it was great for those who were in battle, but the
point is they werent "mudding" as i have come to understand it. 
 If its possible you can check my track record since i have shaken
my fear of losing warp/gnosis that i am on for about 5-8 even 10hrs
(days off) a day. and most of that time you will find me by the
cfire on hyboria doing random heals, random dheals, est. worths,
creating foods, and soliciting ppl for parties. granted mid/highbies
dont want to "drag" since they get that request excessively. but for
those of us who are restricted to "healing" it sux. we cant up our
spells or skills because we cant solo. i know some of u are think
"we'll y did u become a weaver if u wanted to solo", because of the
good points i stated above. but we also wanna "mud" like the rest of
the guilds. we do it at a much slower rate as it is. we dont have
any attack spells other than aol and (the reformed) hob to fight
with (correct me if im rong). these are great when you are still in
the mid-beta range. there is still warp in case of emergencies. but
after that we have to rely on others to help us get exp. we dont get
any better at soloing or gaining exp until we get to a bravo. so
(correct me if needed) our entire gamma experience will solely
depend on parties or drags. our 2 attack spells dont really allow us
to kill much more, since most of us spend our lv'ing on +wis and
+spr. even if we do lv doing +hp im sure we would still get whoop'd
by the same mobs we got whoop'd at as betas. the only soloing
difference i've noticed is i can do monks, dodging in and out of the
room for ticks and self heals, but i can do 5k mobs fairly. but
after 2 or 3 im normally tapped.
 Enuff whining. (HERES THE POINT)
 i have looked into the future of any guild i reinc into past the
beta stage and checked out what the higher guilds/lv's will bring
me. so i try to make sound decision when reinc time comes.
(!!POINT!!) Templar is the one guild that will make being a weaver
well-rounded. still suck at soloing but its better than being a
super-newbie when it comes to that aspect of the mudding. i can not
only rock in parties, but when i cant find one to get into i dont
have to stand around for hrs on end creating tons of food or casting
dheals at random ppl. Templars seems to be my current goal. not to
mention the fact that i have to go thru the confessor guild to get
to it. (MORE WHINING) a guild i am told not to waist any exp on, but
i like the dheal idea. the entire confessor guild (now that i think
about it) seems to be built on the concept of "healers" who cant do
anything else but be idle. granted we will get tithes from generous
souls (korgan, grnbud, oxolotl, etc) and we give that extra umph to
the newbies who have no tick. (!!POINT!!) Templars make going thru
that guild worth while for being able to semi-solo. it gives me
something to look for, other than my 2nd alpha (i think ahead).
 
 Yeah thats basically it. In summary leave Templars alone unless ur
upgrading it. its the only thing that get me excited, knowing im
going to finally be able to kick somethings ass. because as a healer
i rock, but i would like to progress farther. even thou now those
spls/skls cant help me now. besides with the fear of dying and
lossing a level most weavers would rather be idlistic. (idling)
-BL.





-----------------

poster: Tranquil
subject: >Templars
date: Tue Oct 23 21:47:52 2001

>too much spam

You seem to have missed something in your guildtree, Bloodlust, and
you have also missed the point of my last post on this subject.
For the thing you missed, do guildinfo exorcist. Trust me. It will
help you solo a LOT better than templars ever will. Templars is
based on melee damage, and more than likely, woodsman is the only
guild that could do more melee at bravo level than exorcist can do,
from their spells. certainly, templars will not do anywhere near as
much damage as exorcist will.

The second thing you missed, the point of my last post, was that the
WEAVER tree is meant as a HEALING guild, not a SOLOING guild, not a
BLASTING guild, and certainly not a FIGHTING guild. They have some
blasting capability in cleric (not alot, I know), and they get more
in bravo and omicron levels (still not alot, but again this is a
HEALER guild tree), which I dont begrudge of them. Weavers do need
*something* to solo with after all. but to give what is supposed to
be a casting guild tree, a single guild with fighter stats is pretty
dumb to say the least. and if they dont get said fighter stats, the
guild is useless anyway as the weaver cannot stay on combat long
enough for the skills inside the guild to be any use.

Again, I do like the idea of a holy fighter, and I always have. Most
of the muds I have played, I was some kind of holy warrior, as that
is the kind of guild I have always preffered. My point is that if we
are going to have a holy fighting guild, lets do it right rather
than just make a little attempt at it. giving 1 guild a few melee
skills and an enchant does not make an entire holy fighter guildtree
imo.

- Tranquil's rant


-----------------

poster: Chewba
subject: what people moan about
date: Wed Oct 24 00:21:30 2001

Blah from blodlust and Blah from Traq, haven't read the rest. I've
been fig full stop. I always read these things and alway hear every
other guild whine whinge moan. I see newbie figs reincing every
month to cleric.... they always whinge. Why cos they want the worth
but can't stand the waiting for hps. Sort it out. Ask in ideas for a
special race guild that will solo/party blast/tank u up to
Darkstaff's level in a week. You'd probably moan then because you
had to code.

Chewba 'just got in drunk and thought he'd add to spam' toothpaste.

-----------------

poster: Uno
subject: >what people moan about
date: Wed Oct 24 06:00:43 2001

On Wed Oct 24 00:21:30 2001 Chewba wrote post #47:
> Blah from blodlust and Blah from Traq, haven't read the rest. I've
> been fig full stop. I always read these things and alway hear every
> other guild whine whinge moan. I see newbie figs reincing every
> month to cleric.... they always whinge. Why cos they want the worth
> but can't stand the waiting for hps. Sort it out. Ask in ideas for a
> special race guild that will solo/party blast/tank u up to
> Darkstaff's level in a week. You'd probably moan then because you
> had to code.
> 
> Chewba 'just got in drunk and thought he'd add to spam' toothpaste.
you should come on drunk more often. that post fkn ruletta

-----------------

poster: Tektor
subject: Hand Of Balance
date: Fri Nov 16 19:46:06 2001

Hand of Balance seems almost useless now thought I'd study it to do
gold. But even at 80% it does negligable damage took about 40 blasts
to kill a monk. Maybe the spell could be upped to 2 rnds and up the
damage to very low? Even Cure Light wounds heals more damage than
hand of balance can inflict. I'm not asking it be made alot more
powerful just a teeny tiny bit. Even so that its still less than
arrow of light.

-----------------

poster: Jazaman
subject: Hand of balance
date: Sat Nov 17 01:04:02 2001

If you double the rounds and double the damage, it stays the same
for those of us without quick chant.
I have a weaver secondary who uses hand of balance, and changing it
to a 2 round spell could cause him some minor problems as he has to
stay in combat longer to get a spell off.
I personally would prefer it remaining the way it is.  It is quite
sufficient.  If you want power, go arrow of light, if you want
speed, go hob.

-----------------

poster: Lu
subject: >Hand of balance
date: Sat Nov 17 07:28:03 2001

or, if you want to blast, go mage
-lu

-----------------

poster: Tektor
subject: >Hand Of Balance
date: Sat Nov 17 22:03:15 2001

Or I'll just study arrow of light does lots more damage :)

-----------------

poster: Sazaki
subject: FS
date: Fri Dec 21 05:14:22 2001

I have a free reinc ticket fs mb 3.5m mud mail me with your bids
Sazaki

-----------------

poster: Rockman
subject: >FS
date: Fri Dec 21 14:46:34 2001

why is this on cleric.general??

-----------------

poster: Blackmagic
subject: New Clerics
date: Thu Jan 17 23:38:04 2002

I have been playing RD for some time now. I have noticed, or maybe
it's just me, but it is extrodinaraly hard to gain exp on ones own.
Maybe a few events or even being able to offer tithes of exp instead
of just gold.....it would help out us clerics and then the highbies
would have healers

-----------------

poster: Trigon
subject: >New Clerics
date: Fri Jan 18 01:01:51 2002

On Thu Jan 17 23:38:04 2002 Blackmagic wrote post #55:
> I have been playing RD for some time now. I have noticed, or maybe
> it's just me, but it is extrodinaraly hard to gain exp on ones own.
> Maybe a few events or even being able to offer tithes of exp instead
> of just gold.....it would help out us clerics and then the highbies
> would have healers
'PFC DOWN on lostego
You have not been playing RD for some time now, you started in your
networking class a month or two ago, you aren't supposed to gain
worth fast as a newbie.

-----------------

poster: Tahnval
subject: >>New Clerics
date: Fri Jan 18 01:25:58 2002

On Fri Jan 18 01:01:51 2002 Trigon wrote post #56:
> On Thu Jan 17 23:38:04 2002 Blackmagic wrote post #55:
> > I have been playing RD for some time now. I have noticed, or maybe
> > it's just me, but it is extrodinaraly hard to gain exp on ones own.
> > Maybe a few events or even being able to offer tithes of exp instead
> > of just gold.....it would help out us clerics and then the highbies
> > would have healers
> 'PFC DOWN on lostego
> You have not been playing RD for some time now, you started in your
> networking class a month or two ago, you aren't supposed to gain
> worth fast as a newbie.
In any case, clerics aren't supposed to be able to solo very well, and newbie
clerics not at all.

Now, where's that exp button?

-----------------

poster: Sleet
subject: >>>New Clerics
date: Fri Jan 18 03:40:06 2002

On Fri Jan 18 01:25:58 2002 Tahnval wrote post #57:
> On Fri Jan 18 01:01:51 2002 Trigon wrote post #56:
> > On Thu Jan 17 23:38:04 2002 Blackmagic wrote post #55:
> > > I have been playing RD for some time now. I have noticed, or maybe
> > > it's just me, but it is extrodinaraly hard to gain exp on ones own.
> > > Maybe a few events or even being able to offer tithes of exp instead
> > > of just gold.....it would help out us clerics and then the highbies
> > > would have healers
> > 'PFC DOWN on lostego
> > You have not been playing RD for some time now, you started in your
> > networking class a month or two ago, you aren't supposed to gain
> > worth fast as a newbie.
> In any case, clerics aren't supposed to be able to solo very well, and
newbie
> clerics not at all.
> 
> Now, where's that exp button?
they do it better then newbie thiefs or ma's if ya train um right

-----------------

poster: Artea
subject: >New Clerics
date: Fri Jan 18 05:50:42 2002

On Thu Jan 17 23:38:04 2002 Blackmagic wrote post #55:
> I have been playing RD for some time now. I have noticed, or maybe
> it's just me, but it is extrodinaraly hard to gain exp on ones own.
> Maybe a few events or even being able to offer tithes of exp instead
> of just gold.....it would help out us clerics and then the highbies
> would have healers
tithing exp.  heh, theres something i'd say its best not to get into.
Arty

-----------------

poster: Lu
subject: >>>New Clerics
date: Fri Jan 18 06:30:42 2002

newbie clerics solo the best imho

-lu

-----------------

poster: Kasma
subject: New Clerics
date: Thu Feb 14 13:31:50 2002

nods, newbie clerics do solo good if they go ent, because then they
have decent hps/sps and they can clear out newbie valley preety
fast, easy exp.

-----------------

poster: Trance
subject: >New Clerics
date: Thu Feb 14 13:32:44 2002

On Thu Feb 14 13:31:50 2002 Kasma wrote post #61:
> nods, newbie clerics do solo good if they go ent, because then they
> have decent hps/sps and they can clear out newbie valley preety
> fast, easy exp.
Better if they are thrikhren though, since then they can eat corpses
and dont need to regen as much

-----------------

poster: Kasma
subject: New Clerics
date: Thu Feb 14 13:36:05 2002

yo, Thrikhrens were meant for mage, and besides, ents have Exellent
wis, better str, better con, very good spr, and some better hpr.
Thrikhrens have exellent int, that is not the most important cleric
stat.

-----------------

poster: Trance
subject: >New Clerics
date: Thu Feb 14 13:38:02 2002

On Thu Feb 14 13:36:05 2002 Kasma wrote post #63:
> yo, Thrikhrens were meant for mage, and besides, ents have Exellent
> wis, better str, better con, very good spr, and some better hpr.
> Thrikhrens have exellent int, that is not the most important cleric
> stat.
with newbie bonuses, the added few wis isnt going to add much.
Grorrark is a race meant more for fighters than casters, yet I was a
grorrark druid for a few weeks and made better xp than I would have
if I had chosen a more caster race but without corpse eating. for
newbies, corpse eating is probably the greatest help out of all the
possible bonuses you can get.

-----------------

poster: Lu
subject: >>New Clerics
date: Thu Feb 14 15:15:34 2002

i found mindflayer to be very effective, nice spr, eat corpses and i
was never killing anythign where i needed the hp of an ent
-lu

-----------------

poster: Arkangyle
subject: fighters vs casters on RD
date: Thu Feb 14 16:05:06 2002

I will share with you all my first experience on RD, long long ago.

When I initially came here, the game was severely imbalanced.  Close
to 90% of the mud was a drow or vampire elemental and I was told
that this rocked hardcore etc.  So, being new, I listened and went
drow mage.

Now, as a mage I tried the traditional approach ... to use my spells
to kill things.  With the low spr and nearly constant failure of
spells, most of my time was spent sitting and waiting for regen.  I
got bored.

After about a day, I decided to disregard my casting abilities and
just go with hand hits to kill things.  My rate increased
dramatically :P  SO, I thought, if I could kill this much better and
not sit around WITHOUT attack or weapon skills ... I reinced troll
warrior.  I never reinced that character again (level 66 warrior ...
6 levels higher than max for warrior at the time)

Hope you enjoy.

-----------------

poster: Celine
subject: >>>New Clerics
date: Thu Feb 14 20:50:43 2002

I agree on the mindflayer.. my personal fav as a newbie blast type
of any sort. Someone mentioned them not having enough hp.. which
ican see comparatively, but i was able to solo through horses at
level 15..

-----------------

poster: Zax
subject: >fighters vs casters on RD
date: Fri Feb 15 15:26:32 2002

On Thu Feb 14 16:05:06 2002 Arkangyle wrote post #66:
> I will share with you all my first experience on RD, long long ago.
> 
> When I initially came here, the game was severely imbalanced.  Close
> to 90% of the mud was a drow or vampire elemental and I was told
> that this rocked hardcore etc.  So, being new, I listened and went
> drow mage.
> 
> Now, as a mage I tried the traditional approach ... to use my spells
> to kill things.  With the low spr and nearly constant failure of
> spells, most of my time was spent sitting and waiting for regen.  I
> got bored.
> 
> After about a day, I decided to disregard my casting abilities and
> just go with hand hits to kill things.  My rate increased
> dramatically :P  SO, I thought, if I could kill this much better and
> not sit around WITHOUT attack or weapon skills ... I reinced troll
> warrior.  I never reinced that character again (level 66 warrior ...
> 6 levels higher than max for warrior at the time)
> 
> Hope you enjoy.

(thanks to being dragged by some overwished newbie)

-----------------

poster: Arkangyle
subject: >>fighters vs casters on RD
date: Sat Feb 16 04:44:12 2002

On Fri Feb 15 15:26:32 2002 Zax wrote post #68:
> On Thu Feb 14 16:05:06 2002 Arkangyle wrote post #66:
> > I will share with you all my first experience on RD, long long ago.
> > 
> > When I initially came here, the game was severely imbalanced.  Close
> > to 90% of the mud was a drow or vampire elemental and I was told
> > that this rocked hardcore etc.  So, being new, I listened and went
> > drow mage.
> > 
> > Now, as a mage I tried the traditional approach ... to use my spells
> > to kill things.  With the low spr and nearly constant failure of
> > spells, most of my time was spent sitting and waiting for regen.  I
> > got bored.
> > 
> > After about a day, I decided to disregard my casting abilities and
> > just go with hand hits to kill things.  My rate increased
> > dramatically :P  SO, I thought, if I could kill this much better and
> > not sit around WITHOUT attack or weapon skills ... I reinced troll
> > warrior.  I never reinced that character again (level 66 warrior ...
> > 6 levels higher than max for warrior at the time)
> > 
> > Hope you enjoy.
> 
> (thanks to being dragged by some overwished newbie)

*couhgs* I earned a significant portion of my worth PRIOR to taking
you under my wing and teaching you the ropes ... you were a good
blaster though ... fora warrior :)

-----------------

poster: Sigwald
subject: >>templar
date: Fri Mar 22 15:05:55 2002

On Wed Oct 10 04:35:03 2001 Tranquil wrote post #23:
> On Wed Oct 10 03:52:39 2001 Zyz wrote post #22:
> > I think an attack skill or two would make sense in this guild, so
> > that holy warriors could 'smite' or 'bash' evil things. These
> > offensive skills could (would) be fairly ineffective when compared
> > to attack spells, but I think would be thematic and perhaps fun to
> > fool around with. -Zyz
> 
> More suitable would be the removal of this guild from the healer
> tree (after all, theyre healers, not warriors), and an entire new
> guild tree written, starting with a new beta. Preferably something
> that doesnt have slashing (as warriors and priests of holy faith
> are, in most instances, not allowed to shed blood) skills, but
> concentrates on holy shielding and blunt weaponry
> 
> I have something rattling around in my brain that would be a small
> start to this idea but atm have other coding concerns. Eventuaklly
> though if someone hasnt already done so, I will begin work on a
> guild such as this if possible
> 
> - Tranquil is bored of xp and wants 10k back up again
> 
Hmm Templars had swords, period. Wont change that. Could add some
offensive skill I suppose. Thought they had something already...
(or was that a special attack? ). 

-----------------

poster: Sigwald
subject: >spray holy water
date: Mon Mar 25 16:16:21 2002

On Sun Sep 16 03:36:41 2001 Killaaz wrote post #21:
> This spell need to be looked over. tried it out today..after
> 10spells my urn was empty and thats about ~1 sidhe..needed to refill
> my urn ~600sps thats about 1600sps for 1 kill whick i can blast away
> with turn undead with ~1ksps or less
> Would like to see either the amounts of water use/spell lowered or
> the "create holy water" spell spamount lowered..
> //Killaaz

Reduced cost a bit on create holy water and raised a bit efficiency
to fill up bottle. Note that alignment plays an important role on that
spell.

-----------------

poster: Kelyr
subject: Consecrate weapon/shield
date: Wed Mar 27 21:08:37 2002

Was wondering if it might be possible that your weapon shows that
it's consecrated, maybe something like "Your weapon shines with holy
light" or "Your weapon shimmers in radience"
Would just be helpful to know thanks
Kelyr

-----------------

poster: Sigwald
subject: >Consecrate weapon/shield
date: Thu Mar 28 08:25:11 2002

On Wed Mar 27 21:08:37 2002 Kelyr wrote post #72:
> Was wondering if it might be possible that your weapon shows that
> it's consecrated, maybe something like "Your weapon shines with holy
> light" or "Your weapon shimmers in radience"
> Would just be helpful to know thanks
> Kelyr
Added a message, report if it doesnt show for some reason.