|
|
Zulghinlour | Sat 01-Dec-07 02:34 PM |
Member since 04th Mar 2003
9792 posts
| |
|
#223, "I don't see this happening..."
In response to Reply #0
|
Why would you ever do anything other than use your full mana every time? There is zero drawback to this, and imbue is just fine the way it is today. So long, and thanks for all the fish!
|
|
|
|
|   |
|
Dallevian | Sat 01-Dec-07 07:04 PM |
Member since 04th Mar 2003
1711 posts
| |
|
#224, "Or..."
In response to Reply #1
|
You could add a consequence of losing your imbued weapon to cause harm to the ranger, similar to an a-p's unholy. So if it was weaponbroken or disarmed/sac'd, it'd cause a good bit of damage to the ranger. So, the more imbued it is, the more damage taken when loss, but also the better the healing, more frequent the special progs, and more the hit/dam.
That would add more strategy in fighting against rangers, too. Get rid of the weapon.
|
|
|
|
|   |
|
The Heretic | Sun 02-Dec-07 10:13 AM |
Member since 04th Mar 2003
212 posts
| |
|
#226, "battlerager rangers"
In response to Reply #1
|
How about giving battlerager rangers a downgraded skill that puts some bonuses into their weapon? I know battleragers get powers to compensate for not using magic, but rangers are the only battlerager class that loses spells taught in the guild.
|
|
|
|
|     |
|
Zulghinlour | Sun 02-Dec-07 01:08 PM |
Member since 04th Mar 2003
9792 posts
| |
|
#227, "Nope (n/t)"
In response to Reply #3
|
n/t So long, and thanks for all the fish!
|
|
|
|
|