Open Void (720) - please remove the ability for this spell to hit adjacent rooms. There is zero indication that this spell is cast, giving people in adjacent rooms time to move and there is no way to defend from it so it is doubly irritating. I was so disgusted/pissed with getting killed by an open void spell that was cast in an adjacent room and the spell caused debris to go through my eye for a rank 3 instant kill (I just got to the hunting ground and I was killed by a spell, cast in a different room - that's fricking retarded), 3 weeks ago that I just logged out and only came back into the game today to depart, spell up and try thing again. I was so disgusted and frustrated with it I took a small break.

I'm back and wanted to go hunting again.....Having 80 ranks of swimming, trained for armor worn, not encumbered or wounded, but constantly failing swim check in whirlpool for going to Nelemar. Once in a great while is annoying, 2 times in a row is irritating, 3 times in a row is overly frustrating and a 4th time in a row is down right fricking disgusting, especially when it causes a wound and causes health loss. Fix this awful mechanic.

I failed 4 times in a row to swim the whirlpool and I'm so irritated with this crap that I logged out. This is supposed to be a game to play, not something to outright infuriate people with horrific game mechanics to the point they want to quit playing.


Since I'm venting, here are other things that irritate me, but probably won't be changed/fixed.

Some spells/signs are missing from the Spell Active window - why are things missing from it? Where did they go? Celerity is missing. Any COL or Voln signs are missing.....what happened?

I'd love to have a little expansion to weapon skills being available to pures that actually train in weapon skills. One or two basic weapon feats/skills they could obtain would help add a little flare to their weapon swinging abilities.

Create a basic list of shield and armor skills that pures can dabble in if they put in the proper TPs into the skills. They get some basic CMANS they can train in if they put TPs towards CMs, why not some basic shield and/or armor skills?

<There is zero indication that this spell is cast, giving people in adjacent rooms time to move and there is no way to defend from it so it is doubly irritating. I was so disgusted/pissed with getting killed by an open void spell that was cast in an adjacent room and the spell caused debris to go through my eye for a rank 3 instant kill (I just got to the hunting ground and I was killed by a spell, cast in a different room>

If you see messaging to the effect of the air rushing from the room (sorry, I don't have the exact messaging), that means that open implosion has been cast in an adjacent room and you're in danger if you remain where you are. It'll actually occur 2-3 times before the final round when air rushes back into the room and can injure/kill you. Doesn't help much if you entered the room between the last two rounds, but there is an indication.

The wandering voids on planes 1-3 of the Rift act similarly to the void cause by open implosion and don't give warning before causing damage in adjacent rooms, but aren't the result of any player or critter cast spell. It stinks when one of them wanders into a room next to you while fighting, but it's pretty easy to keep track of them and avoid them.


<Having 80 ranks of swimming, trained for armor worn, not encumbered or wounded, but constantly failing swim check in whirlpool for going to Nelemar. Once in a great while is annoying, 2 times in a row is irritating, 3 times in a row is overly frustrating and a 4th time in a row is down right fricking disgusting, especially when it causes a wound and causes health loss. Fix this awful mechanic.>

Have you tried removing your armor before making the swim?

I don't have experience with Nelemar, but swimming across Maelstrom Bay in armor heavier then brig isn't possible. Those wearing chain/plate have to remove it for the swim and put it back on once they finish the swim (or get someone to cast 112 on them and walk across instead). Maybe something similar is happening here?

Starchitin, the OG

A severed gnomish hand crawls in on its fingertips and makes a rude gesture before quickly decaying and rotting into dust. A gust of wind quickly scatters the dust.

Sarcasm aside, dev has recently done a lot to support heavy exp sinks and/or unconventional playstyles for square and semis, including...


-Reducing Spell Aiming costs for squares and semis
-Increasing Spell Aiming caps for semis
-Adding a new bolt spell in Ranger Base
-Buffing wearing non-plate armor for warriors
-Creating Kroderine Soul to improve squares who neither know spells nor get outside spells...
-...while also stating(1) that Kroderine Soul is intentionally weaker than knowing spells due to the heavy experience requirements
-Allowing semis' success rate ceiling with assault and area of effect weapon techniques to match squares'
-Intentionally(2) allowing rotation between weapons to basically bypass assault and area of effect cooldowns due to the heavy experience (and funding) requirements


...so it's a bizarre disparity to me that the line gets drawn at pures learning weapon techniques when there are already built-in requirements of weapon ranks, Combat Maneuvers ranks, and (in more cases than not) Multi Opponent Combat ranks. Of course, there is still the possibility of them learning weapon techniques through ascension(3) and possibly even pre-cap archetypes, which I hope happens, but all of the above are just doable through classic old TPs.





Citations:

(1) (two links) https://discord.com/channels/226045346399256576/532373273816858636/807298526299291668 and https://discord.com/channels/226045346399256576/532373273816858636/865319553600978944 (scroll down slightly to see the rest of what he's saying)

(2) https://discord.com/channels/226045346399256576/532373273816858636/852556266165633047

(3) https://discord.com/channels/226045346399256576/532373273816858636/851154118327926835 (scroll a bit down through that for more context)

>I also think one thing your summary isn't touching on is the issue of post-cap progression being stuck at level 100.

For everything I labeled as heavy experience requirements, I originally had written post-cap exp sinks, but then figured someone out there might go for an early bolt Moonbeam ranger or potentially even a paladin using Fire Spirit in Grimswarm camps or something.

But yes, I agree. Post-cap progression is a different ball game.





>So what results is a balancing act - how do you enable the mutant swinging builds that some people really enjoy without compromising what makes pures pures, and squares/semis squares/semis?

Here's my thing on this... (fair warning for length)

There's no clear vision of what does make any of them squares, semis, or pures, other than a technical definition that (mind-bogglingly enough) doesn't even reference their physical or magical capabilities.

Here's a Discord discussion:

Gehayi — 06/10/2021

Monks are semis (they can cast), but the system treats them as squares. I never understood that.

Darncena 💚 — 06/10/2021

I'm curious about you defining monks as semis because they can cast. Squares can cast as well. My understanding of the definition is:

* Squares have access to two minor spell circles. (Two total, none unique)

* Semis have access to one minor spell circle and a profession base spell circle. (Two total, one unique)

* Pures are defined as having access to two spell circles (minor(s) or minor/major) and a profession base spell circle. (Three total, one unique)

Leafiara — 06/10/2021

Players calling monks semis in disguise (or, for that matter, calling warmages and warpaths semis in disguise) is the gap between technical definition and player perception.

The technical definition, and by that I mean the definition that dev seems to use, is what Darcena relayed. The colloquial ideas (at least to some players) are either:

A) whether the build is expected to train both weapons and spells in order to succeed (in which case all three would qualify)

B) whether the build is able to viably hunt with weapons or spells, given enough experience, while having supported mechanics for each built in to unique profession attributes (in which case warmages and warpaths would qualify, but monks wouldn't since they have no killing spell)

The latter is also why some players said paladins felt like squares who happened to have a unique circle, at least prior to the recent review, as 1615 didn't have its EVOKE version to be more lethal and less of a setup.

Naijin — 06/10/2021

The technical definition is pretty simple. One minor circle, and one profession circle.

Monks, by definition, are clearly not semis.

Darcena nailed it.

Darncena 💚 — 06/10/2021

I think sometimes people are trying to cram physical/magical archetypes into the square/semi/pure definition when they are separate things.

Leafiara — 06/10/2021

Darcena pegged it in briefer terms.

Though I'm not sure it's the right characterization to say they're trying to cram physical/magical archetypes in, when that's the basis of their gameplay experience.

Gameplay design can happen through formulas, spreadsheets, and documents, but the average player isn't looking at things through that lens. They're just playing a game.

Darncena 💚 — 06/10/2021

Right, but they're conflating two different dimensions because they only hear the one set of definitions.

Now, Darcena's not staff, but Naijin hadn't left the conversation and didn't say that any of her followups were wrong, so I can only infer that the technical definition truly is a separate thing from physical/magical archetypes.

If it's just number of spell circles and whether one is unique, then adding weapon techniques to pures--or more combat maneuvers or any number of other possibilities--has no effect on their definition. Nor would creating a more magical monk path (just for example), which was one of the planned archetypes.

Speaking of magical monks...

Nidal — 07/26/2021

ok Bullrush slaps

loving this

Naijin — 07/26/2021

A square being a square and not using 1219 makes me happy.

Even he casually implies that square identity is related to physical vs. magical combat. Except it apparently isn't according to the technical definition, which is why a monk using 1219 wouldn't make one a semi.

Reiterating that word "casually," I'm pretty sure this second quote is a more lighthearted conversation that doesn't seriously touch on square identity. Still, that's just the point: at times, people aren't even talking on the same wavelength because there's a frustrating fuzziness about what does and doesn't entail being a square, semi, or pure.



Before I run any longer, I'll end with this:

When the technical definitions are so minimal, almost anything should go design-wise. However, since almost anything doesn't go, people look for patterns to infer additional components to the definitions of either profession categories or individual professions.

I really think dev should either A) more thoroughly flesh out the definitions to fit the professions/categories as they are, or B) embrace the minimalism as a reason to explore more design space for things like war pures and magic-heavy squares, as they've already done with furthering semis on both physical and magical fronts.

The game has probably moved past squares, pures, and semis, at this point. These are just legacy terms from RoleMaster. I realize nobody will give up on them because they are common parlance and nostalgic, but they don't serve much of a purpose here now, aside from arguing semantics.

It's kind of like saying a spell list needs to have spells in each of the first 20 spell slots. It's just a convention from what is now a fairly different game.

On the topic of profession design, allowing players to create more viable builds certainly allows for experimentation, creates diversity, adds replay value, and adds longevity to play. Having strengths and weaknesses for different professions (and races) is an important element, but there's nothing that says that these strengths and weaknesses can't be overcome with the right kind of training. There's no reason except the game designer's directive to say that a wizard couldn't spend 100 ranks in combat maneuvers to learn 1 rank in berserk. And I know I use this example often, but it illustrates the point.

PSM3 gives the same kinds of skills to everyone with the same training (mostly), which eventually creates the same cookie-cutter patterns that all post-cap training does. It does so in a way that is complex and elegant, though. My feeling is these would be better implemented as a point-buy system that allows players to choose specializations. It looks like it was created this way, initially, but changed afterward.

Should professions that were designed to cast spells earn weapon techniques? That's the designer's call, as it is with berserk. More options are good. Hopefully ascension will address some of this.

Single/double/triple in Spell Research, not least.

Single/double in weapon skills/CMan, tilted the other direction.