Speaking as a former vindicator, bloody shackles having the additional effects of manacles and sequester is too overpowered. There's been discussion that this is the current case and if so, I'm hoping its either a bug or you plan on introducing some way of becoming unwanted without dying.

Being wanted isn't supposed to be an insta-slay and as such, you shouldn't give force duel, barrier and wither to vindicators. Similiarly, you shouldn't have bloody shackles (inability to run on foot) combining with inability to cast spells and inability to magically teleport. In essence, its a slightly weaker form of force duel that doesn't require nearly as much sacrifice to get and isn't nearly as rare. Just hoping you'll consider this, especially since its a huge kick in the junk to outlanders.

Has there been a code change recently to make them so much stronger? Or is it the fact that there are now Vindicators around alot more often and people don't like that? Just curious.

And so it goes...

This is definately an addition that at the very least, I've never noticed before. Take that or leave that, last time I was bloody shackled was years ago so for all I know it coulda went in a day after that. However, from what everyone else is saying, this is a new feature.

I thought bloody shackles were very good as was, bordering overpowered but not because you could run away. Frankly, sequester is bad enough. Portable sequester is much worse. Its just too overpowered. Tribunals having uber-power is not what this game needs. Every other cabal its a matter of competancy of the players, with tribunal its like if they get their asses kicked they just get new powers. At least, such has been the trend, and I don't know what type of rebalancing benefit everyone would experience from all of this except for an overall higher frustration if you aren't a tribunal.

While the shackle combination seems like it is a tad much, I agree.

"Every other cabal its a matter of competancy of the players"

You cannot be serious. I mean really now..

"with tribunal its like if they get their asses kicked they just get new powers. "

Yes please tell me all the elite powers magistrates are getting that compare to "portable haste", "portable dam redux", "portable autoattack,aggro mobs", "portable increased def/offense" etc etc etc

{SCION} the Archmage of Eternal Night: Say it.

I've played all of two ragers in my CF career,
and by far, I would take outlander powers over
them ANY day!

It does take some serious skill to be a 'good rager',
and given the sacrifice, and costs of the powers, you
still have to have a level of competence to use them
effectively.

Running up to a rager berserker while he's thirsting and
not being prepared for it is not skillless on the rager
part, but on the attacker who did it.

Hell, the two ragers I played literally sucked. My outlander
had 50 kills give or take, solo, my last rager had.. 3 mage kills,
and I don't think I suck mechanically, but for the sake
of the argument, Tribunal Vindicator powers such as they are
pre-FNCR, take little skill. Shackle, rescue, end of story.

I've played a perma-wanted Outlander relatively recently. It wasn't an immense standout character. I got my ass beat a lot by about five different cabals.

I certainly remember running away so an out-of-range hero Vindicator wouldn't catch me when I was still low level, but, you know? Even for a constantly wanted character constantly fighting Tribunal, that's definitely the one cabal that didn't kill me ever. I don't think any character I've played has died to a Tribunal, and it's not because I'm not dying.

Its because they're newbies. Are you insinuating there have never been any ultra lethal tribunals?

It's sort of like Santa Claus.

I'm not saying Santa Claus doesn't exist, but I've never knife-fought him in a dark alley.

I'm not saying ultra-lethal Tribunals can't or don't exist, but I've never come up against one. I've come up across multiple Fortress, Battle, Empire, Scion, etc. that have beat my ass. That doesn't mean a Tribunal can't be tough, but it seems to indicate to me that it's a damn sight rarer.

There was that one invoker for instance that had almost 200 pks if I recall. Its because Tribunal doesn't attract Pk'ers, because its not as offensive as Empire/Fortress/Scion/Battle.

Its not the powers, a tribunal has no incentive to kill anyone besides WANTED people and outlanders. How many 'PK players' play many tribunals? You've got Grurk's player, uh, and thats about it. The 'Jhyrbian's (to pick a random name that is associated with a PK'er) of the world just don't play Tribunals and that has more to do with the type of cabal it is than the powers.

.

{SCION} the Archmage of Eternal Night: Say it.

If you're of the mindset that you should be overall lethal, then tribunals are lacking. But the majority of the playerbase cares more about defensive capability and in that light, I can't think of a less likely to get you con-killed cabal combo.

Tribunals powers are very good given :

A) Its an easy cabal to get into and do well in.

B) They are not REQUIRED to raid Outlander in the same manner that Outlander is required to raid them. Their offensive risk-taking is completely managable.

C) They can affect people not in their range.

D) They have an easy time looting and causing XP penalties.

Tribunals give up very little and for many players its an incredibly safe cabal choice. Vindicator powers are very, very good.

>I can't think of a less likely to get you con-killed cabal
>combo.

Really? Couple points here.
1) Against outlanders it seems like a straight forward war. Order vs chaos, cities for tribs, wilds for outlanders. Player skill comes into play and of course numbers, however this equation works out will impact either sides death rate.

2) Ever notice what happens when Battle/Scion decide to war with the Tribs, it's a slaughterfest.


>Tribunals powers are very good given :
>
>A) Its an easy cabal to get into and do well in.

I'll take Empire powers over trib's thanks. I will also take the easy in Fortress and gear handovers and power ranking over Tribs thanks.

>B) They are not REQUIRED to raid Outlander in the same manner
>that Outlander is required to raid them. Their offensive
>risk-taking is completely managable.

I see tribs raiding a lot right now..are you sure?

>C) They can affect people not in their range.

So can outlanders and imperials (centurions are mean) oh and 4 hero paladins and healers and muters etc etc

>D) They have an easy time looting and causing XP penalties.

Yes, they have an easy time looting in a city. Anyone wanted will have an XP pen upon death if I recall correctly. The only thing I hate is that there are aggro guards in the most strange places sometimes.

>Tribunals give up very little and for many players its an
>incredibly safe cabal choice. Vindicator powers are very, very
>good.

Depends on the player, I cannot imagine how I would not pk in town. How about having people retrieving and then sitting one room from your outer and then you have to protect them while they heal up? Add to that it's the most boring job in the game.

Complaining of normal trib powers is just so wrong. Shackles were looked at, so that's that. Now I think I'll log on and go kill more tribs.

{SCION} the Archmage of Eternal Night: Say it.

2) Ever notice what happens when Battle/Scion decide to war with the Tribs, it's a slaughterfest.

Scion's powers aren't better than tribunal's in that, they're severely limited to their effectiveness without foresight and planning and controlling the situation. Typically what you're describing yet again has more to do with who is playing tribunals versus who is playing Scions. Scion pastes everything when they have a couple decent players in there, and get their asses whipped when there aren't. Its not the powers, its the players. Battle on the otherhand trumps most cabals power wise but more so when you're dealing with newbies. I typically loved fighting ragers with my vindicator because bloody shackles = dead rager 98% of the time unless the guy is a defender and even then guards help a lot when it comes to fighting ragers. What happens though is rager berserkers storm galadon and gang down some hapless newbie. That has nothing to do with ragers, check out my uncaballed shaman killing two berserkers in Galadon one of which was played by Amora. Its not because I had awesome cabal powers, its because I knew how to exploit the fact that they were in Galadon.

>This is definately an addition that at the very least, I've
>never noticed before. Take that or leave that, last time I was
>bloody shackled was years ago so for all I know it coulda went
>in a day after that. However, from what everyone else is
>saying, this is a new feature.

It's somewhere between a couple months to a year old.

>I thought bloody shackles were very good as was, bordering
>overpowered but not because you could run away. Frankly,
>sequester is bad enough. Portable sequester is much worse. Its
>just too overpowered. Tribunals having uber-power is not what
>this game needs.

IMHO, Tribunal powers balance pretty well with Outlander powers, with the restrictions and advantages to each cabal versus the other in their interplay.

That said, I would rate the Tribunal powers as strictly inferior to every other cabal's powers. I would have said this for Justice, and Arbiter's powers/situation were generally weaker than theirs. I would have said this for Arbiter, and Tribunal's powers/situation are generally weaker than theirs.

>Every other cabal its a matter of competancy
>of the players, with tribunal its like if they get their asses
>kicked they just get new powers.

I think you're on drugs. Sequester in place of zero-spellcasting was a Christmas wishlist change. It makes Trib a lot better against some kinds of opponents and a lot worse against others. On the whole, it makes manacles et al. more equally a moderate pain in the ass to everyone instead of a huge pain in the ass to a small subset of characters and almost no pain in the ass to most others. On the whole, it's a wash.

Law cabal powers/jurisdiction and the difficulty of being wanted has, in general, ever decreased as the game has evolved. In retrospect, if people have trouble with Tribunal, I'm not sure how Arbiter, with every character in the cabal, relatively, an instant super-combo of most of the best of Provincial Magistrate, Justiciar, and Vindicator, plus advantages none of them currently have, ever lost.

>At least, such has been the
>trend, and I don't know what type of rebalancing benefit
>everyone would experience from all of this except for an
>overall higher frustration if you aren't a tribunal.

See above.

To be perfectly honest, and yes, I'm aware of your character history... I don't feel that you have a good handle on the strengths/weaknesses of this cabal / being wanted relative to other situations. I won't deny you've played some solid characters, but I don't think it's given you the master understanding of CF balance that you think.

All that said, I thought about how all this works a little more today and tweaked it a little more, again coming to a crash/reboot near you.

Ironically if your standard of measure is that I'm not that good then the fact that I found them ridiculously powerful as stood should probably tell you something.

As for Arbiters, compare and contrast everyone else's powers around that time too, and bear in mind that their powers got nerfed hard. Its not like they vanished because of lack of reproduction, you guys got rid of them and substantially reduced Tribunal's powers. I'm sure there was some logic for that.

If no-magical-transport isn't a very powerful ability why is there only one other ability in the game that can do that? And the hunt can only be called during a full moon in wooded rooms. Sequester solo isn't a big deal, but in combination with classes like necromancer, shaman, etc its downright sick. Thats solo, in groups its even better.

I don't know Nep, you're boggling me on this one. Only one guy can think shield bash is good but this is just a minor annoyance.

You misunderstood me. Read that post again.

I said, basically, that despite playing some pretty good characters, I don't think you have the grasp on how one thing balances vs. another that you think. Playing a Vindy gives you some insight, sure, but it's not necessarily foolproof, and in some cases I think you're drawing some incorrect conclusions. I appreciate that you're trying to speak out for game balance issues as you see them, but you also have to admit and appreciate that you don't always have all the facts.

For example, how much stronger/better combat-wise (we're putting aside the obvious go-anywhere advantage here for the moment) would you guess a Vindicator's special guards are versus an equivalent Magistrate of Seantryn Modan?

As an aside, some of the scenarios you're constructing we've already thought about and, to some degree or other, accounted for.

Well, in light of this and your above comments, I'm somewhat ashamed to admit that over the course of playing three Outlanders, I have died 10 times to Tribunals.. But then, I did smoke a truckload of those bastards! At least one of those deaths was due to sequester, while I was raiding Tribunal and got trapped by the "T" set up at the Executioner. But I really think I should have died much more to it than I did.


I have no idea what you did to bloody shackles, but I think it was a legitimate concern, as of four-five days ago, that they caused CAPS damage, prevented spellcasting, and landed a sequester effect. My experience with being shackled (before the change) is that it is highly difficult to neuter the damage while you're actually fighting the Tribunal - you have to beat the snot out of him and make him run/die, OR you have to recall/teleport out. Then, you can neuter them. Post-change, it seemed like the only option was to beat the snot out of the Tribunal like some manner of quasi-force-duel at extreme disadvantage. If the Tribunal is reasonably competent, it seems like you shouldn't be able to beat the snot out of him. Thus, I concluded, like Eskelian, that in the hands of a reasonably competent Tribunal, bloody-shackles-with-sequester is a free PK. So much so that if I were playing an Outlander, I might avoid retrieving/raiding while a competent Vindicator was online. Which seems a damned shame because that's the whole purpose of CF - to give the perception of balance so that you think if you'd done just one thing differently, you would have won.

Anyway, I'm not sure how you could possibly balance bloody shackles with sequester -- but I'm sure I'll get an idea from watching logs third hand.

And, as a side note, it would be amusing if you gave Insect Swarm to the Outlander leaders. I guarantee you this board would light up like a Christmas tree from the complaining ... from the same people claiming neo-bloody shackles is just fine.

Yeah, I get what Nep is saying but I agree with you Balrahd. We'll see in game how things turn out.

>I think you're on drugs. Sequester in place of zero-spellcasting
>was a Christmas wishlist change. It makes Trib a lot better against
>some kinds of opponents and a lot worse against others. On the
>whole, it makes manacles et al. more equally a moderate pain in the
>ass to everyone instead of a huge pain in the ass to a small subset
>of characters and almost no pain in the ass to most others. On the
>whole, it's a wash.

No way. Even though no-spellcasting completely nullified spellcasting, those mages could just flee and quaff or zap their way out once they got manacled. Sequester is a way way more effective tool for killing people than the old manacles were. And that's what counts, right? Add onto that the fact that manacles still prevent spellcasting to a quite high degree. Given the choice, I'd take sequesters any day of the week.

>Law cabal powers/jurisdiction and the difficulty of being wanted
>has, in general, ever decreased as the game has evolved.

Now I think you're on drugs. The annoyance of being wanted is greater now than ever. Huge powerup of galadon city guards, hamsah guards, eastern road guards anyone? Assigning constant (and quite beefy) anti-criminal mobs to the imho top 3 pk areas in the game is a way bigger pain in my wanted characters' ass than some random PCs that you can just avoid with minimal effort if they're not in your range, and kill with the same small effort if they are.

>IMHO, Tribunal powers balance pretty well with Outlander powers,
>with the restrictions and advantages to each cabal versus the other
>in their interplay.

Agreed. Atleast, before someone came up with the completely ####ing ridiculous idea of slapping sequesters onto bloody shackles. Of course I'm glad you guys (the staff) are fixing this issue. However, I cannot really understand how you get away with defending the game-balancy correctness of bloody shackles/sequesters, saying that bloody shackles will be fixed, and dissing DC's concept of game balance because he complains about bloody shackles all at the same time

And to answer your somewhat tricky question regarding special guard toughness, I'd say that the vindicator guards are about 33% weaker than magistrate special guards assuming that both tribs are the same level. (Although seantryn special guards might be weaker than galadon guards, I have no idea about that.. Seantryn magistrates tend to be low level, and in that range the regular cityguards in seantryn are a much greater issue than special guards)

>No way. Even though no-spellcasting completely nullified
>spellcasting, those mages could just flee and quaff or zap
>their way out once they got manacled.

They could, but did they raid that way and kill Arbiters/Tribunal? I can't say I recall seeing a lot of that.

This year, I've seen a fair bit of it. I've also seen a decent number of players who weren't awesome play frequently-wanted Outlander casters and do pretty well with it.

>Sequester is a way way
>more effective tool for killing people than the old manacles
>were. And that's what counts, right? Add onto that the fact
>that manacles still prevent spellcasting to a quite high
>degree. Given the choice, I'd take sequesters any day of the
>week.

Depends. Manacles on a good day is rough on casting in combat, but you're probably not going to die as an invoker now because you can't put your protective shield spell back up for 10 ticks.

>Now I think you're on drugs. The annoyance of being wanted is
>greater now than ever. Huge powerup of galadon city guards,
>hamsah guards, eastern road guards anyone? Assigning constant
> and quite beefy) anti-criminal mobs to the imho top 3 pk
>areas in the game is a way bigger pain in my wanted
>characters' ass than some random PCs that you can just avoid
>with minimal effort if they're not in your range, and kill
>with the same small effort if they are.

Oh, you're forgetting *so* much stuff.

How about not being able to buy anything anywhere while wanted?

Or having to go straight through every patch of guards in the game because there weren't alternate routes anywhere? (This is the single biggest one to me. If I wanted to go from the Forest of Nowhere to Camelot, I had to pass guards. No ifs, ands, or buts. And they'd all track me everywhere.)

Or getting attacked by a stalker or a bunch of Arbiters while raiding a cabal to try to get your item back?

Or losing XP (non-capped loss, 15k) dying while flagged, every time, no matter what killed you?

Or being flagged for crimes you committed when no Justice/Arbiters were even logged on?

Or being flagged for attacking a Justice/Arbiter trucking down the Eastern Road with no criminals on? (And having that pretty much be okay.)

Or vigilance that was detect hidden for all Arbiters everywhere (if you're a wanted thief/assassin, this was a pain in the ass).

Or guards, including special guards, with all detects including acute?

Or bashing special guards?

I can go on like this all day.

The Galadon guards aren't that bad. The Galadon Battlement guards, I'll give you, are mean and a half.

>Of course I'm glad you guys (the staff) are fixing
>this issue.

If by fixing you mean changing it so it isn't that way anymore, that's not happening.

>However, I cannot really understand how you get
>away with defending the game-balancy correctness of bloody
>shackles/sequesters, saying that bloody shackles will be
>fixed, and dissing DC's concept of game balance because he
>complains about bloody shackles all at the same time

See above. Looking into and making adjustments does not equate to the sky is falling.

>And to answer your somewhat tricky question regarding special
>guard toughness, I'd say that the vindicator guards are about
>33% weaker than magistrate special guards assuming that both
>tribs are the same level. (Although seantryn special guards
>might be weaker than galadon guards, I have no idea about
>that.. Seantryn magistrates tend to be low level, and in that
>range the regular cityguards in seantryn are a much greater
>issue than special guards)

It was a trick question, and you nailed the essence of it. Magistrates have the best special guards of all the flavors of Tribunal by a wide margin. I was assuming someone'd say Justiciar/Vindicator have better ones.

Thanks for a good and non-condenscending reply.

>>No way. Even though no-spellcasting completely nullified
>>spellcasting, those mages could just flee and quaff or zap
>>their way out once they got manacled.

>They could, but did they raid that way and kill Arbiters/Tribunal?
>I can't say I recall seeing a lot of that.

No, I didn't. But I haven't ever seen a manacled mage kill a tribunal after the changes either. Woe is us without snoop.

>This year, I've seen a fair bit of it. I've also seen a decent
>number of players who weren't awesome play frequently-wanted
>Outlander casters and do pretty well with it.



>>Sequester is a way way
>>more effective tool for killing people than the old manacles
>>were. And that's what counts, right? Add onto that the fact
>>that manacles still prevent spellcasting to a quite high
>>degree. Given the choice, I'd take sequesters any day of the
>>week.

>Depends. Manacles on a good day is rough on casting in combat, but
>you're probably not going to die as an invoker now because you
>can't put your protective shield spell back up for 10 ticks.

Magic 8-ball says said invoker either had a battlerager mentality or was a n00bie that was too scared to leave his gang :p

>>Now I think you're on drugs. The annoyance of being wanted is
>>greater now than ever. Huge powerup of galadon city guards,
>>hamsah guards, eastern road guards anyone? Assigning constant
>> and quite beefy) anti-criminal mobs to the imho top 3 pk
>>areas in the game is a way bigger pain in my wanted
>>characters' ass than some random PCs that you can just avoid
>>with minimal effort if they're not in your range, and kill
>>with the same small effort if they are.

>Oh, you're forgetting *so* much stuff.

Actually, I didn't forget most of those things... I've only played cf seriously for about five years, and my comparison was based on roughly y2k vs now. Although I mostly played perma-wanted ragers back then, I wasn't annoyed by flags nearly as much as I am now.

>How about not being able to buy anything anywhere while wanted?

Doesn't matter much to me. I get almost all the buyable preps and supplies I need from pking.. I don't think I've ever had a char that bought or bartered for preps more than 10 times during its lifespan. Healing now, is another issue.. But I've never seen any effects on whether or not you can use healers as a criminal.

>Or having to go straight through every patch of guards in the game >because there weren't alternate routes anywhere? (This is the >single biggest one to me. If I wanted to go from the Forest of >Nowhere to Camelot, I had to pass guards. No ifs, ands, or buts. >And they'd all track me everywhere.)

Before my time :p

>Or getting attacked by a stalker or a bunch of Arbiters while >raiding a cabal to try to get your item back?

Before my time :p

>Or losing XP (non-capped loss, 15k) dying while flagged, every >time, no matter what killed you?

Must be before my time. I know that losing XP when you die has been the official way things worked during for some of my playing time. However there has always been ways to avoid xp-loss if you do have to die as a criminal.

>Or being flagged for crimes you committed when no Justice/Arbiters >were even logged on?

>Or being flagged for attacking a Justice/Arbiter trucking down the >Eastern Road with no criminals on? (And having that pretty much be >okay.)

Hey, weren't we talking about *being* a criminal, rather than how to get there?

>Or vigilance that was detect hidden for all Arbiters everywhere (if >you're a wanted thief/assassin, this was a pain in the ass).

It probably was.. But to me, whether or not I can see a lawman is more important than if he can see me. As long as I can spot 'em, it's easy to just run away.

>Or guards, including special guards, with all detects including >acute?

>Or bashing special guards?

Before my time :p

>I can go on like this all day.

Yeah, alot of things have changed just in my time here. And I'll concede that my perspective on being a criminal was a bit egocentric.. We all have different playing styles and changes affect us differently. I guess that some of the relevant changes in the last couple of years simply managed to hit me where it hurts

>The Galadon guards aren't that bad. The Galadon Battlement guards, >I'll give you, are mean and a half.

Dude, my last three outlanders all died humiliating deaths being permalagged and ganked down by a those ####ers.. And they were all level 35+ warriors. During the course of those characters I also hooked the sultan up with 6-8 sets of eq. In general, I die nearly as often to anti-criminal but non-tribunal mobs as I do to the actual tribunals and their special guards.

>>Of course I'm glad you guys (the staff) are fixing
>>this issue.

>If by fixing you mean changing it so it isn't that way anymore,
>that's not happening.

>>However, I cannot really understand how you get
>>away with defending the game-balancy correctness of bloody
>shackles/sequesters, saying that bloody shackles will be
>fixed, and dissing DC's concept of game balance because he
>complains about bloody shackles all at the same time

>See above. Looking into and making adjustments does not equate to
>the sky is falling.

I typically don't care about changes to cabal powers, because they don't matter all that much. It's all about the player.. The only cabal that requires a significant change of approach is ragers because they're much harder to outdamage, but very easy to kill if you do.

Anyway, the reason I chimed in here is because with sequester being slapped straight onto bloody shackles just seems wrong to me. If I were to play a vindicator warrior with that cabal power, I could guarantee the death of almost any criminal once I found them.

And vice versa, there are some vindicator class combos (a pole spec warrior for example)* that I can see no way of engaging solo without relying on an rng longshot for them not to be able to arbitrarily kill me (of course I'm assuming neither player will make mistakes).

*This might be falsified if I'm wrong about a recent change to charge set. Historically, if you attacked a pole spec with skills like trip or cranial for example and you got charge set, you wouldn't be lagged at all. This made trip polespec;entwine an almighty move. I pulled this off successfully a few times with eyzy, but the last time I tried it, I got lagged for 2 rounds and the whole shebang failed. In retrospect, since I never tried it after that failure, I realize it might've been caused by netlag.

>No, I didn't. But I haven't ever seen a manacled mage kill a
>tribunal after the changes either. Woe is us without snoop.

True enough. I've seen it happen a number of times, even by, say, invokers I wouldn't consider great. I'm not going to tell you it's not still something of an uphill battle, but it's a lot different than it was last year.

>Magic 8-ball says said invoker either had a battlerager
>mentality or was a n00bie that was too scared to leave his
>gang :p

Most of the time, yeah, though I did over the years see some pretty tough mages die because of manacles, admittedly often not to the Arbiter/Tribunal who manacled them. There's nothing like seeing someone's detect invis go down while they're manacled (and not have pills for it since they're a mage and not used to thinking about it), only to be ganged down by an invis Empire gang three ticks later.

>Actually, I didn't forget most of those things... I've only
>played cf seriously for about five years, and my comparison
>was based on roughly y2k vs now. Although I mostly played
>perma-wanted ragers back then, I wasn't annoyed by flags
>nearly as much as I am now.

Battle soaks flags pretty well and always has, truth be told. They sure cut through stalkers faster than about anyone else in the Justice era.

As an aside, in the era of the biggest wanted Battle bloodbaths I can remember, guilds weren't raidable. (i.e., they were totally inviolate... once you got in, you were safe from anyone not of your same class.) That's another big change that I think has encouraged a criminal element.

>Doesn't matter much to me. I get almost all the buyable preps
>and supplies I need from pking.. I don't think I've ever had a
>char that bought or bartered for preps more than 10 times
>during its lifespan. Healing now, is another issue.. But I've
>never seen any effects on whether or not you can use healers
>as a criminal.

I actually think criminals shouldn't be able to use healers in the four protected cities, possibly plus Udgaard just because it's Udgaard, but that's neither here nor there.

To a degree, I think how much not being able to buy/barter does or doesn't hinder you can depend on the kind of character you're playing. For a mass-murdering perma-wanted character built very similar to Eyzy I don't think I'd need/want a lot of buyable preps or items, although detect invis would be nice. For other characters I might really really want one or two key things that are easiest to buy/barter or only available that way, or a key piece of my quick ghost regear might come that way.

>Hey, weren't we talking about *being* a criminal, rather than
>how to get there?

Mostly, but you figure if it's harder to get wanted, a higher percentage of people who are wanted are tough-ass bastards who look at a flag and think, "I can suck that up and still beat all y'all."

>I typically don't care about changes to cabal powers, because
>they don't matter all that much. It's all about the player..
>The only cabal that requires a significant change of approach
>is ragers because they're much harder to outdamage, but very
>easy to kill if you do.

Yeah, that's always been a hard part about playing Battle, especially Battle warriors, for me. If someone outclasses you badly straight up, it's very hard to find an angle to surmount it.

>*This might be falsified if I'm wrong about a recent change to
>charge set. Historically, if you attacked a pole spec with
>skills like trip or cranial for example and you got charge
>set, you wouldn't be lagged at all. This made trip
>polespec;entwine an almighty move. I pulled this off
>successfully a few times with eyzy, but the last time I tried
>it, I got lagged for 2 rounds and the whole shebang failed. In
>retrospect, since I never tried it after that failure, I
>realize it might've been caused by netlag.

You eat some of your command lag when the command gets blocked by charge set so you can't just spam past it, yeah. This works right now, and it worked right for the first couple years specs were in, but I think it was broken for some indeterminate amount of time in between.

It was a trick question, and you nailed the essence of it. Magistrates have the best special guards of all the flavors of Tribunal by a wide margin. I was assuming someone'd say Justiciar/Vindicator have better ones.


I thought it was the Provost. Just to add I hate sequester and I'll like to see manacles changed to affect all classes equally. Manacles at this point do little to limited a warrior or priest.

>If I wanted to go from the
>Forest of Nowhere to Camelot, I had to pass guards. No ifs,
>ands, or buts. And they'd all track me everywhere.)

Galadon Outskirts?

>
>>If I wanted to go from the
>>Forest of Nowhere to Camelot, I had to pass guards. No ifs,
>>ands, or buts. And they'd all track me everywhere.)
>
>Galadon Outskirts?

Didn't exist. That's one of many pro-criminal area-based changes made over the years. You couldn't walk around any city in any reasonably direct way, actually. You had to go straight through.

Not really sure what things in 98 versus now has to do with much. Those things were changed, probably for the reasons you've stated. Sylvans had awesome powers back then. You could plant growth on eastern and snare, at one point you could call the hunt in Galadon on suckers in their guilds and then go gang the crap out of them while they couldn't do ####, rager powers are much better and I recall many tribunal/rager throwdowns...Being an arbiter was sweet, but so was being a Sylvan, or an Imperial, or a Knight. Powers were beefier all around. Things weren't balanced. We get that. I agree, give Marcus those powers and he's going to kill 500 people. Lord knows he tears it up without those powers enough.

I recently adjusted the damage and some details on this. The mud had been up for a little while the last I checked so it's probably not in yet, but I imagine coming to a crash/reboot near you.

I'll wait to see how that shakes out before commenting/adjusting further.

Thanks but on the gankiness scale, I just don't see being able to have portable free 'the hunt' as a good thing.

nt

Thanks. If its not a big deal could you guys respond on this thread when its been given a thumbs up or down? Would appreciate it.

I'm just wandering if the damage for bloody shackles is coded wrong. When they slap the manacles on, you take a graze, but with each action, you take capital damage and that? Seems to me that they should be reversed. IE: Hefty damage up front, then the manacles dig into you as you do things like moving or that.

You might not get an exclusive one on one location, but you have also hobbled the person horribly. They can run a bit, but they aren't going to get far, so you have a containment area. They can't get out magically, and they get hurt for doing anything. The forced duel at least gave you a one on one equal footing chance.