Ridiculous Critical Resist Rate for Necromancer Lulls

[Splorf22]

I have been trying out a necro and aside from the fact that I have yet to get a single group invite over 3 levels I've been doing ok. However, I have noticed that Rest the Dead has an insanely high critical resist rate compared to what I am used to on an Enchanter. Unfortunately this is not easy to parse from logs but I would guess about 75% of resists are critical. Basically I've gotten to the point where any time I get a critical resist I automatically FD. If I had to guess, I would bet that necromancer lull is charisma dependent and probably should not be.

[Infamous]

Not a bug. Confirm working as intended. Necros are not chanters , period.

Not grtting grps for your mage, now your necro? Working as intended also

[SamwiseRed]

the following statement is based off my experience only, no evidence to support claims

i mained a cleric on live, i used to lull/pacify/whatever everything. hard resists were seldom. on here lull is crazy hard resisted. just saying. my memory could be shot i dunno.

[Infamous]

Just saying, cant compare a chanter with 200+ cha to a necro who rarely has more than 100.

[kaev]

the following statement is based off my experience only, no evidence to support claims

i mained a cleric on live, i used to lull/pacify/whatever everything. hard resists were seldom. on here lull is crazy hard resisted. just saying. my memory could be shot i dunno.

I'm curious whether you were using Lull-line heavily pre-Velious on live. What you say matches my experience with Lull-line crit fails on live (rare) vs p99 (way more often than "rare"), _BUT_, I used Lull-line very little pre-PoP so for all I know it really was this crappy during classic era.

[Nirgon]

Go try on eqmac pal

[nilbog]

I have been trying out a necro and aside from the fact that I have yet to get a single group invite over 3 levels I've been doing ok. However, I have noticed that Rest the Dead has an insanely high critical resist rate compared to what I am used to on an Enchanter. Unfortunately this is not easy to parse from logs but I would guess about 75% of resists are critical. Basically I've gotten to the point where any time I get a critical resist I automatically FD. If I had to guess, I would bet that necromancer lull is charisma dependent and probably should not be.

I will look into seeing if necromancers are affected differently than other folks, but fails should be common.


i mained a cleric on live, i used to lull/pacify/whatever everything. hard resists were seldom.

Past 2002, it worked, sure. Before that, it did not.

Go try on eqmac pal

eqmac is Planes of Power era and should have no aggro for their lull/pacify spells.


Here is a thread with older debate and various links.
http://www.project1999.org/forums/showpost.php?p=212385&postcount=17

[xCry0x]

Just saying, cant compare a chanter with 200+ cha to a necro who rarely has more than 100.

The question/issue is the spell line for necro should not be based off a CHA modifier, similar to their charm spell.

Necro's generally have gear with massive amounts of -CHA so having spells need CHA wouldn't make sense.

That said. I was always terrified to Lull on cleric because that shit resisted constantly. Even now, calming my way around seb is a gut check on every cast although it is exponentially better now than it was at lower levels.

[Nirgon]

Well then, another reason I hate EQ post Velious. Good to know.

[kaev]

...

Here is a thread with older debate and various links.
http://www.project1999.org/forums/showpost.php?p=212385&postcount=17

Heh, read that thread & links. No wonder I don't recall using Lull-line with my Paladin in the classic days on live, probably supressing bad memories of trains from hell and wiped xp groups.

[Danth]

Nah, by the time you got into grouping you already knew not to use those spells. Long and the short of it was they effectively just didn't work (maybe once in a blue moon) with Harmony being a major (and outdoor-only) exception. Hence why feign pulling and use of enchanters was the norm. I played a Paladin for a good many years, and I well remember both the lull line's uselessness and it's later revamp into overly good functionality--then, as a Paladin, the annoyance of never getting an upgrade to "Pacify."

I can't speak for the Necromancer undead lull spells, but I've no particular memory of them using such spells much.

Danth

[Splorf22]

I will look into seeing if necromancers are affected differently than other folks, but fails should be common.

I don't think Necromancers are affected differently. I think they are affected exactly the same, and I wonder if that is accurate. It's not really an effectiveness issue because even with 75% critical resists you can FD and try again which is not an option for an enchanter. It just doesn't really make sense to me that necromancer lull would have charisma based failure, but I didn't post any evidence, just a gut feeling.

On Loraen (with 225ish charisma) I would guess that Lulling a L50 mob I would get about 50% resists (compared to like 5% resists for normal spells) and of those resists about 5% would be critical resists.

I know Xornn says Lull is worthless in his enchanter guide but a) he ran around with 100 cha and b) he didn't have a WC cap in case of an ugly critical resist. IIRC there was a post where someone (Giegue?) posted evidence from ~2000 that Lull worked pretty well but my search foo is sucking tonight and I can't find it.

[kaev]

Maybe the higher level spells in the line could be used successfully if you've got a good option to get out of Dodge, the specific spell Lull has the second issue of not reducing agro range enough for relatively closely spaced mobs. You'd have to be standing 3 steps from the zl.

[falkun]

I know Xornn says Lull is worthless in his enchanter guide but a) he ran around with 100 cha

I'm pretty sure all non-bard lulls are CHA based, which means Xornn's advice would be applicable for your necro.

[koros]

Lull was horrible, it's probably too good for enchanters. Didn't "critical resist" come later?

[nilbog]

Lull was horrible, it's probably too good for enchanters. Didn't "critical resist" come later?

No, it was there from the beginning. As Danth said, I learned early with my paladin that it was only useful to pull with. It was more like "critical success" that was the rarity. This did not change until after Velious when it was then usable by everyone. I mean, really useful.

There was a reason there was specific mention from Rich Waters.

Traditionally, most lull spells haven't really worked very well. Lull had a high resist rate and wasn't very reliable. We've recently looked at lulls and improved the way they work to make them more useful to players. You should find that the lull line of spells works more often than it did, though it will still fail some of the time.

It did not work, and it did fail from the beginning. Harmony did work, and too well. Nerfing harmony's absurd usefulness, they made the lull line as a whole work better.

But, I can only say this from personal experience with a paladin, cleric, and enchanter of the time. Those were people I knew irl and grouped with daily. If there was something strange about necromancer lull, I believe it was isolated to necros, which I have no experience with.

Should be researched.

[Nirgon]

We definitely would try to pacify our way through lower guk live side before Kunark, especially the king room. I'd note that we never invised all the way down. There might need to be more see invis creatures down there, or the ones that do, (the frogs at least) should all green aggro.

[koros]

I was agreeing with you about lull not being that useful Nilbog. I was just under the impression that originally a "resist" from lull was the same as a "critical resist" is now, and that if the spell was resisted the mob aggroed. Therefore critical resist was added to make lull more useful, by virtue of the fact that a critical is a somewhat rare event even worse than a normal (non aggro resist).

Am I incorrect? I didn't use lulls that often, but played with classes who had them.

[Treats]

I think koros is right. There shouldn't be a difference between a critical resist and a regular resist on the lull spell line. Any resist should probably cause aggro making the spell line nearly useless (classic).

[Splorf22]

I think koros is right. There shouldn't be a difference between a critical resist and a regular resist on the lull spell line. Any resist should probably cause aggro making the spell line nearly useless (classic).

Casters realm from 2000: according to the wayback machine:

http://web.archive.org/web/20010505024734/http://eq.castersrealm.com/spells/enchanter/spelldescriptions.asp?SpellID=8

here are three options when you cast Lull on something. 1) It works as advertised. 2) It's resisted and you have to recast. 3) It's resisted and the mob comes after you, as well as all of his buddies. My recommendation for this spell is do *not* depend on this spell to make unwinnable situations winnable. Use it to make winnable situations even easier.

Lull has 2 effects 1) reduce call for/respond to help radius and 2) reduce % for something to help if it does actually receive the call for help. It is resisted the same as any other save vs. magic and 50% of resisted spells result in aggro response. Against high blues/whites this is about a 40% resist and thus a 20% chance of aggro response. It is unwise to try to lull yellow/red cons in a camp with lower cons. Always be prepared for the worst, but it's great for setting up a staggered spawn. This spell can be useful in non-camp situations where there are frequent roving MOBs. Since it reduces the call for help radius, it can cut down on the number of roving MOBs that join the battle. Note that the spell DOES work on undead, but they have HUGE call for help radius' and thus the effect is not as marked. Later spells in the series increase the aformentioned effects.

[pasi]

We definitely would try to pacify our way through lower guk live side before Kunark, especially the king room. I'd note that we never invised all the way down. There might need to be more see invis creatures down there, or the ones that do, (the frogs at least) should all green aggro.

Water Elemental see all, stomp all, roar.

Also, Jurassic is likely casting lull on mobs of a similar level. Your enchanter is likely lulling mobs 12-15 levels below you.

[Raev]

Bump.

I don't know whether Lull is too effective for era or not, but I really don't see why Necromancer lull should depend on Charisma.

[koros]

No, it was there from the beginning. As Danth said, I learned early with my paladin that it was only useful to pull with. It was more like "critical success" that was the rarity. This did not change until after Velious when it was then usable by everyone. I mean, really useful.

There was a reason there was specific mention from Rich Waters.



It did not work, and it did fail from the beginning. Harmony did work, and too well. Nerfing harmony's absurd usefulness, they made the lull line as a whole work better.

But, I can only say this from personal experience with a paladin, cleric, and enchanter of the time. Those were people I knew irl and grouped with daily. If there was something strange about necromancer lull, I believe it was isolated to necros, which I have no experience with.

Should be researched.

2 years late, but since this thread is back on top... that's what I meant. Lull was horrible. If you got a resist it was a "crit resist" everytime. The idea of a non-crit resist came later.

[Daldaen]

Yea I tend to find lulls to be a bit too effective here for my liking, as I don't recall many people splitting rooms like that. That being said, this is just my thoughts and I mostly attributed it to people being bad at EQ 15 years ago.

Harmony was/is absurdly OP, but it's OPness is balanced out by the outdoor restriction (when most tightly packed mobs that matter are in dungeons). I will say I am a bit salty they removed Harmony from VP though. Damn you classic devs.

As far as necro lull goes, I can't say I have too much experience with it. Most of the times I just faceroll on my necro. Once I get a bit higher I may start to play with certain HS wings and see how lulls work for me. I've always found sending pet and rooting/screaming terroring everything to be pretty damn effective. Enough such that lulling doesn't cross my mind.

[pasi]

Lulls are definitely used more often here. Anyhow, my opinion hasn't changed a ton in the 2 years since this thread started.

Lull is fairly reliable in high-end Kunark Dungeons such as Sebilis/Howling Stones because the player is usually 10-18 levels higher than the NPC being lulled. Depending on your camp, the majority of NPCs people are killing in these places are 43-50. In places likes Lower Seb, Lull starts becoming unreliable/dangerous where mobs are 6-8 levels lower than the player.

I've always believed the high-end Kunark dungeons were intended for leveling through the 50s. They weren't designed around level 60 play. The same goes for Level 50 Planes as a level 60. People tend to forget that most of the hardcore players on live weren't 60 until mid Velious. NToV guilds recruited 55+. You could join EToV raids at 51+. The idea of having to be max level to tackle content in an expansion wasn't a thing until mid-Luclin. That's my experience/opinion at least.

TLDR: You dudes are lulling mobs in their 40s on a level 60.

[Daldaen]

Pasi definitely raises valid points on level 60s crushing high 40s/low 50s mobs.

That being said, I don't experience that may critical resists on my enchanter when I've been exping in LGuk and Kedge in my 40s (mobs between -8 to +2-3 my level). Though the very first lull I cast on a blue sarnak when I was beginning to lull the house in BW for my epic turnin was a critical fail. That made me a sad panda.

[Raev]

I've always believed the high-end Kunark dungeons were intended for leveling through the 50s. They weren't designed around level 60 play. The same goes for Level 50 Planes as a level 60. People tend to forget that most of the hardcore players on live weren't 60 until mid Velious. NToV guilds recruited 55+. You could join EToV raids at 51+. The idea of having to be max level to tackle content in an expansion wasn't a thing until mid-Luclin. That's my experience/opinion at least.

+1. IMO there are really only two areas in Kunark that are more or less level appropriate for a group of full 60s, IMO: HS East and lower Sebilis. Even Bard lull does not work very well in on the Spore King's guards, and when I was trying to solo him I think I failed lull on a Warrior 30x in a row once.

Also stop trying to derail this thread from its intended purpose, which is to remove the Charisma component from Necromancer lulls.

[koros]

Obviously anecdotal, but my impression on lull is that should resist as any other all or nothing spell, but have no chance at non-aggro on a total resist. With that in mind, the all or nothing resist rate on 60s vs 45s isn't going to be that high.