charm: some actual evidence rather than QQ

[Splorf22]

http://wiki.project1999.org/index.php/Xornns_Enchanter_Guide and
http://wiki.project1999.org/index.php/Xornn's_Enchanter_Spell_Guide

These were stolen from a Tripod page. It looks like Xornn started in late kunark (he had breeze), hit 50 around Velious, and took a break until Luclin at 56.

Some quotes:

Under charm soloing he says 'honestly I usually get 2 fights in easy using attack slow as the edge'.

'That's all there is to it, really. Charm sometimes holds for 5 minutes. Other times it holds for 5 seconds.' [note: that was about the L12 spell even!]

'Charm soloing is very dangerous now, and if you do choose to fight this way, it's important to consider this factor--if the average charm is 2.5 minutes (reasonable with my experience), can your pet finish the fight with your pull in that time? At one point in charm soloing, about 40 to 50, mobs you charmed could kill two other mobs before charm broke. You will find with the colossal increases in total hit points of the mobs, even the heavy hitting charmed pets have trouble finishing a fight in under three minutes. Dealing with a charm break is practically expected at this point, unless you are able to locate a set of low hit point mobs that will carve each other up quickly. I no longer recommend using slow on the enemy mob, as you will rarely hold a pet that can survive two fights in a row, and losing your pet can often mean zoning because you don't have the mana to nuke finish a mob. Successful charm soloing usually involves a pair of mobs spawning together, rooting one, charming the other and letting them battle it out, doing your best to make sure your pet barely wins, allowing you to break charm and have a fleeing mob left to finish off with nukes. You may even consider hasting your pet, to make for a reliable kill time. If you choose this route, then I suggest slowing the enemy, and going for a two mob kill before charm breaks. A strong haste is often enough to pull this off, but you can go from full health with Rune V up to very dead in seconds in this situation.'

So, here we have:

1) He could kill 2 L50 mobs reasonably frequently with charm if he hasted the pet. A L48-50 Sarnak Myrmidon has ~10K hp. I remember parsing it once, and it did about 100 dps with DW and haste, so probably 50 base dps and 75 with haste. 2 of them would be 20K hps @ 75 dps or 250 seconds plus 10-20 seconds to find mob #2. This would require a 4.5 minute charm. Without haste, it would require 400 seconds or 6.5 minutes.

2) He could kill 2 L40-45 mobs reasonably frequently with charm without haste at L50. A L44 Lava Duct Crawler has ~4.5K hp and does maybe 40dps without haste. That gives us 225 seconds, or just under 4 minutes of fighting time.

3) He claims the 'average charm' is 2.5 minutes. I assume this is counting all the breaks. I don't trust this as much as the calculations since we humans are very bad at averaging this kind of stuff in our heads.

So what I get from the guide is that at 50+, on mobs 5-10 levels below the enchanter, with tash but without malo, charm should last 4-5 minutes fairly frequently, break early some of the time (maybe 20-25% of the time), and generally break before 5-7 minutes.

If you believe in Xornn's memory over raw calculations, you get a 3-4 minute charm fairly frequently, with some early breaks, and the occasional 5-6 minute charm, which works out to an average of 2.5 minutes.

This is somewhat less duration than charm before patch, but clearly more than we are getting now. Kind of amazingly, I actually agree with Verant's balancing there. Keep in mind that the risk of charm soloing with a hasted L49 pet is really, really high. As he says, 1 bash = dead enchanter.

P.S.

With all that said, I had a great time in Sebilis last night with TMO (their reputation on this board seems totally undeserved) doing stuns and slows. So I am still enjoying my enchanter, even without my froggy pets. And if you guys can find better evidence that the current charm is classic, I'm not going to ragequit.

[Hmotzart]

>CLAPS<

http://www.project1999.org/forums/showthread.php?t=35018

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

[Kassel]

Charm requires malo, make more friends imo =D

[Splorf22]

I find it hilarious that the rage thread has 50 posts and the evidence thread has 3. Anyway, I would like a comment from the devs on this, even if its just 'we're not convinced, live with new charm'.

P.S.

Gave Chardok a try with a Shaman for malo Kassel. It's definitely better, but I still managed to get 3 <30 second charms in a row (after keeping the pet charmed for an hour) at a bad time and had to ditch. I think I ended up charming mainly because with shaman slow I didn't have anything else to cast :cool:

[ziahh]

http://www.fohguild.org/forums/90145-post124.html

Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 6
-1 Internets
charm itsself is NOT broken. Charm is the victim of a changing environment and thusly needs to be modified to keep pace with that environment. I have been using charm for many years in much the same way I use it now. Before any expansions were released, enchanters were soloing the ghoul lord and fire giants area with charmed pets. When kunark was released, we kept pets in groups in Sebilis that doubled the entire groups experience over a 4 or 5 hour experience grind. During Velious, we could charm giants in Kael that easily netted twice the exp normally recieved in an experience group. Velious is where the environments started to change and become much more favorable to charming. Once equipment and player stats started reaching the proportions they did in velious, the risk of charm became trivial. The only problem with Velious and Luclin was that there were not many areas where charm soloing was much more effecient then grouping. So most enchanters ignored the ability.

Now we have Planes of Power. There are quite a few things in this expansion that make charming too good to ignore.

- Zones typically have wide open spaces where you can outrun mobs
- Mobs are spaced farther apart making solo pulling trivial.
- Mobs dont summon
- Mobs have generally low hit points and defense.(This would seem to be the charm equalizer. But doesnt work)
- Mobs have extremely high ATK and max hits.

Because of these factors, the risk vs. reward is out of whack. When an enchanter can get an aa in 17mins by 2boxing a cleric outside of the group vs grouping and getting an aa every 1-2 hours, there is a problem with risk vs reward.(yes its possible. I have done it at a sustained rate).

Back before kunark, we would go solo fire giants for the thrill. IT was damn scary because a charm break at the wrong time meant about an 80% chance of death. With POP, a charm break at the wrong time means you cast the following spells: wom, run til spell gems refresh, mez your pet, retarget the prey, cast root. If it knocks your rune off, pop eldritch rune and root. ZERO risk. none, nada. You have to be a complete and utter idiot to die to a situation like that.

But bringing back the idea of summnoing mobs makes my skin crawl. It was a cheesy tactic. It would make charm mostly useless and not worth the time because it will only take 1 charm break to kill an enchanter. Granted, you may escape if charm breaks when no prey is in camp, but if there is prey in camp, you are dead. One wom resist on either your prey or the pet and your dead. Even if you do manage to get wom off, by the time you do, your hp will be so low, the prey will bloodlust onto you and you will be toast before you can do anything about it. If mobs were to summon again, to make charm useful, we would have to be compenstated with an instant low resist root or something.

So the real problem is not charm. We have been using charm exactly how it was designed since inception. The real problem is the environment.

Of the points listed above:

- Wide open spaces: Changing zone designs is out the the question
- mob spacing: Might be possible but would have unforseen consequences
- Summoning: Think I have covered this one
- Low hit points and defense: cant really do anything here. It would unbalance every other class.
- Extreme ATK: ding ding ding! We have a winner.


Typically enchanters haste their pets. Given a dual wielding pet with haste and a 2boxed druid for heal/snare, charming is the only way to experience!(Hello all you tactics people! And you know who you are :P). So Verants first idea with the 1% slow was a pretty good one but didnt go far enough. These mobs even without haste and dual wield, can tear through their brethren pretty easy. Especially with a botted druid or cleric to heal it. Dire Charm was limited in level for a reason. If you could of dire charmed an Illis and dual wielded and hasted it, a single enchanter could of cleared jugs in Sebilis and given the protector a run for his money. So Verant level limited Dire Charm to 47. The reason they did that was because mobs of that level and lower didnt have enough ATK to do amazing feats.

The reason I use Dire Charm as an example is simple. The risk vs reward of a high level pet that was perma charmed was deemed out of whack by Verant. Basically, given the environmental variables mentioned above, you have the same situation. Mobs that are permacharmed with very little risk. Even thoguh they do break, a broken pet in wide open pop zones is pretty trivial to recharm.

Given this logic, the reasonable thing to do would be to add an effect to charm that lowered a mobs melee level to a much lower level(I am thinking 57). Kind of like those ae's in the spell database that lower a characters spell casting level. This would greatly reduce their attack and defense. It would still allow us to dual wield and haste where it was allowed, but their average hit would be for much less. When charm broke, because the effect was part of the charm it would wear off and the mob would go back to its normal level. This doesnt increase the risk of charm but it lowers its overall effectiveness which is really the problem anyway. This would still allow enchanters that like to solo, to be able to solo. But you wont be able to earn AA at astronomical rates. I still think it should be faster then a group but only slighly so. MAybe 50mins or so per aa. It also addresses melee issues that an enchanter makes them somewhat worthless in groups.

Of the points listed above:

- Wide open spaces: Changing zone designs is out the the question
- mob spacing: Might be possible but would have unforseen consequences
- Summoning: Think I have covered this one
- Low hit points and defense: cant really do anything here. It would unbalance every other class.
- Extreme ATK: ding ding ding! We have a winner.


Typically enchanters haste their pets. Given a dual wielding pet with haste and a 2boxed druid for heal/snare, charming is the only way to experience!(Hello all you tactics people! And you know who you are :P). So Verants first idea with the 1% slow was a pretty good one but didnt go far enough. These mobs even without haste and dual wield, can tear through their brethren pretty easy. Especially with a botted druid or cleric to heal it. Dire Charm was limited in level for a reason. If you could of dire charmed an Illis and dual wielded and hasted it, a single enchanter could of cleared jugs in Sebilis and given the protector a run for his money. So Verant level limited Dire Charm to 47. The reason they did that was because mobs of that level and lower didnt have enough ATK to do amazing feats.

The reason I use Dire Charm as an example is simple. The risk vs reward of a high level pet that was perma charmed was deemed out of whack by Verant. Basically, given the environmental variables mentioned above, you have the same situation. Mobs that are permacharmed with very little risk. Even thoguh they do break, a broken pet in wide open pop zones is pretty trivial to recharm.

Given this logic, the reasonable thing to do would be to add an effect to charm that lowered a mobs melee level to a much lower level(I am thinking 57). Kind of like those ae's in the spell database that lower a characters spell casting level. This would greatly reduce their attack and defense. It would still allow us to dual wield and haste where it was allowed, but their average hit would be for much less. When charm broke, because the effect was part of the charm it would wear off and the mob would go back to its normal level. This doesnt increase the risk of charm but it lowers its overall effectiveness which is really the problem anyway. This would still allow enchanters that like to solo, to be able to solo. But you wont be able to earn AA at astronomical rates. I still think it should be faster then a group but only slighly so. MAybe 50mins or so per aa. It also addresses melee issues that an enchanter makes them somewhat worthless in groups.


some quote with link :

SPell allure

http://replay.web.archive.org/20020704055606/http://eq.castersrealm.com/spells/spelldescriptions.asp?Id=142&Page=1

Quote:
Unbelievable - Brainslayer (1/28/2001)

Due to having multiple enchanters in our groups, I was able to play around with this spell on a recent fire giant raid in solusek b. I never relized how powerful it was before until I casted it on Warlord Skarlon. He was charmed for atleast 5 min. It was the funniest thing when when a fire giant warrior began to summon him, the entire dungeon nearly died laughing, but so did I when he broke the spell.


Quote:
WOW - Cassie (1/28/2001)

I cast this on a Dark Ritualist in the MM tower the other day for grins, and it was lasting upwards of 5+ minutes. To give you an idea of how long this lasts, two of my buds had time to duel, the loser got rezzed, and then medded to full all w hile the pet remained charmed. This wasn't a one-time shot either. I've noticed this routinely lasting for 4 to 5 minutes before breaking (though I've sometimes had it break after 20 seconds LOL) Not only that, in the new patch as of today we will get a message when Charm is going to break. WOOHOO!!!!! No more sudden surprises when that Hill Giant or Seafury is about to turn on you The run of chanter twinks with each patch continues.


seafury 38-42 and dark ritualist 33

Quote:
XICOTL, By Ordeith (1/28/2001)

Xicotl in MM is a wonderful target for this spell, hits for 100 max, casts spells, tons of HP...*grins* I charmed him and he was soloing half of the garden area around the damph, spell held for around 10 mins also, with 200 cha of course.

Now,

Remember 1 thing : First charming at low lv is more dangerous and thus charm breaking will occure more often due to the fact the a blue mob will be within the range of only 6 level below you.

At higher lv charm is holding more steady due to the fact that a blue mob range from 1- 12 lv below you. a good exemple of that is sebilis.A lv 55 enchanter charming a dar knight wich is lv 44-49 make the duration of the spell more realible. That is why it is often goes up to the full duration.
http://eqbeastiary.allakhazam.com/search.html?id=5013

When i tested charm in beta i was soloing in sebilis with a lv 50 enchanter and i couldnt solo at all because charm was breaking too often. Yes i could kill a few mob but the risk was too great to make solo viable.

It eventually became more realible around lv 52 and higher.

[Nedala]

Enchs were soloing FGs in classic and people on p99 claim it was OP. Looks like it was actually even more OP on live, im pretty sure most of the enchs just had no idea to max cha, use tash and stack with malo and thats why people remember charm being so bad on live. But actually it was pretty good if you look at reports from people who were not absolutely clueless.

[baalzy]

That's what I've been saying. The only thing that happened on live between classic and PoP in regards to Charm was knowledge. You still had random early breaks, but people generally could rely on it to last 5+ minutes.

[Blingx]

Enchs were soloing FGs in classic and people on p99 claim it was OP. Looks like it was actually even more OP on live, im pretty sure most of the enchs just had no idea to max cha, use tash and stack with malo and thats why people remember charm being so bad on live. But actually it was pretty good if you look at reports from people who were not absolutely clueless.

Or maybe enchanters weren't actually soloing FGs in classic. Where is the 2001 post that claims this?

Maybe I missed one, but so far all these posts claiming to solo FGs are dealing with eras where AA are obtainable(aka not classic) OR talking about stacking with spells that require more than 1. (aka not solo)

[guineapig]

Before any expansions were released, enchanters were soloing the ghoul lord and fire giants area with charmed pets. [B]

[ziahh]

Or maybe enchanters weren't actually soloing FGs in classic. Where is the 2001 post that claims this?

Maybe I missed one, but so far all these posts claiming to solo FGs are dealing with eras where AA are obtainable(aka not classic) OR talking about stacking with spells that require more than 1. (aka not solo)

u havent read the entire post i made. there are 3 2001 post about low lv ench charming , and then read the comment i made below.

[Splorf22]

I don't think the Fires of Heaven post is that great because its kind of vague 'oh we could do this' when in reality he probably died 10 times for every time he killed a giant or two.

But if you read Xornns enchanter guide and do a little math its just obvious that at 55, in Kunark and Velious, he could get 4-5 minute charms on L50 mobs pretty frequently even without malo. The posts on castersrealm just back that up. I really don't see how anyone can read this thread and claim that our current charm durations are classic.

[Sorrow*qc]

so when are they gonna fix this?

[ziahh]

i dont know but i have not played more then 3 hours since the charm nerf.

My enchanter is dead at 58 atm. Will stay that way unless they fix it.
i understand that not every enchanter like soloing with the risk attributed to it but i did like many others and now enchanter are just good for crack and haste.
the class is dead....

[Sorrow*qc]

do like me, start a twink

[ziahh]

do like me, start a twink

i have 3 already. no thx. :(

[chr0nix]

Think about it, if you were a dev and you were getting complaints about how OP charm was, what would you do? The current system needs to be overhauled. I guarantee they decided to nerf it to be unusable to make all the non charming classes happy while they fix the charm system. Either that or everyone on project1999 team has a grudge against Enchanters....

[nalkin]

i dont know but i have not played more then 3 hours since the charm nerf.

My enchanter is dead at 58 atm. Will stay that way unless they fix it.
i understand that not every enchanter like soloing with the risk attributed to it but i did like many others and now enchanter are just good for crack and haste.
the class is dead....

During the 58 levels you went through charm soloing, and having played a few alts as a comparative reference, did at no point you think that enchanters were kind of OP? Considering at their pre-nerf state they were mages with better pets, cc, and mana regen.

[inyane]

Well, I've seen plenty of chanters lfg lately, and have had zero problems getting clarity at all times.

I can only conclude that the people whining, bitching, and quiting on the messages boards are the small minority.

I hope it never gets changed.

See ya!

[Splorf22]

I don't think the class is dead without charm. Charm is (was) certainly the most awesomely cool ability of the class but aside from buffs we can also be very effective in groups with slow, stun, manataps, mez, etc. Think about it: if you bring an enchanter, your damage goes up 50%, and their damage goes down 50%. It's like playing the game on a reduced difficulty setting. Enchanters are and are supposed to be awesome in groups.

The general decision here has been that Verant gets to make the decisions about what is OP and what is not. I think its pretty clear that the latest charm durations deviate from that significantly. The question is whether or not the devs will bring them back in line with classic or not. Either way, I'm not going to quit my character, and I appreciate the free server. My engineering background just feels like this is, well, wrong.

P.S. Nalkin is a mage who, despite having it explained to him several times, doesn't understand that there is a huge difference between charming in a group with a shaman/mage for malo and a cleric to heal you on charm breaks and soloing.

[Jamal]

Just throwing this out there...I charm soloed damn near everything that wasnt a dragon on in a plane in classic. Ghoul Lord, Ghoul King (I actually soloed him WITH the ghoul lord once...long story), Effreti, Fire Giants ( though I never made it to Rokyl or whatever his name is...the last named one by Nag), etc. Started in my 30's soloing the spectres in Oasis and just kept moving on from there. This was mainly just due to the fact that there was nothing else to do; and since I had no life at the time I may as well try it while the group I played with wasnt on =D

That said: I died doing it. ALOT. A whole lot. Particularly with fire giants, if I remember correctly. Charm was never very reliable in classic. Of course, I havent logged on to P1999 in months, and never leveled past like level 30 anyway, so I have no dog in the fight as to how it is here (though I plan on playing some more now that Kunark is live). I'm just pointing out that charm by it's very nature is stupidly overpowered in a game like EQ, where the power of the average MoB is so vastly superior to that of the average equal leveled PC. It was always very unreliable in classic, and even Kunark....but it wasnt really until Kunark and after that people actually tried to use it very much as a tactic. It got better in Vellious, which I always assumed was a bone Verant threw to enchanters for going from an Xpac like Kunark, where enchanters were essentially gods, to an expansion like V where most every later game (not even end game) MoB was either giant flagged, or just immune to magic...basically making enchanters only good for buffing.

[Blingx]

Before any expansions were released, enchanters were soloing the ghoul lord and fire giants area with charmed pets.

Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 6
-1 Internets
Before any expansions were released, enchanters were soloing the ghoul lord and fire giants area with charmed pets.

Jul 2002
Release date - Planes of Power - 2002
Outdated info is outdated.

Let me try putting it this way. Quoting someone in 2002 whom is remembering something that happened in 2001 is no different than quoting someone yesterday whom remembered something in 2001.

The goal is to quote someone in 2001 saying something about 2001. (Present tense)

That exact post from FOH has been thrown around these threads like candy and all pro-charmers rally behind it like a gospel, when in fact, its credibility is near zero; just like his post count. It has no sources(ss/data/logs) only 1 post saying "Hey this is how I remember it."
Deja vu~

[Blingx]

Lets assume charm is horribly left of center.

Argument:
Charm is broke.

Reason:
Cannot charm mob a->n for desired length of time.

Proof:
Post x says we can charm solo FGs for desired length of time, sometimes.


When posting quotes about being able to solo FGs, it might make sense to actually go and try to solo FGs before claiming charm is broke.
Where are these log attempts?

[yaeger]

I was going to make fun of all you whiners who complain about charm not being as effective now. But I'm not going to do that.

We definitely need charm fixed so enchanters can solo all non-raid content because that's exactly what this game needs. More solo classes to be exploited so this can become more and more non-classic in terms of game-play.

Posts that focus on why Enchanters should remain stupid OP while classes like Rangers, acknowledged underdogs in classic, get minimal support and make me question whether or not any of you are concerned about the bigger picture of the server.

You guys only seem to do research and defend to the death only the things that will benefit you. I hate you for trying.

Whoops, looked like I started in on the whiners, sorry guys.

[mimixownzall]

Oh, noes! Enchanters are going to have to group like the rest (most) of us!

OH THE HORROR!!!

On the Kunark Beta Test server I was boxing a 53 cleric with my 55 enchanter and clearing all of disco 1.

Tell me this isn't rediculous.

The devs have it right the way it is now.

My only suggestion is to have it work better at lower levels (mid 30's).

I used to solo specs in Oasis at 34 on live.

[Rilen]

I don't think the Fires of Heaven post is that great because its kind of vague 'oh we could do this' when in reality he probably died 10 times for every time he killed a giant or two.

But if you read Xornns enchanter guide and do a little math its just obvious that at 55, in Kunark and Velious, he could get 4-5 minute charms on L50 mobs pretty frequently even without malo. The posts on castersrealm just back that up. I really don't see how anyone can read this thread and claim that our current charm durations are classic.

Highlighted the important bit. That's about where we were at pre-nerf. At 54/55 in Chardok, just after server released Kunark, we were getting 5-7 minute durations on the lvl 50/51 sarnak. Occasionally it would last a bit longer, occasionally it would break sooner. Imo that's about par for mobs 2-3 levels lower than you. At the point we're at now, we're lucky to get that on mobs 15 levels lower and light blue/green.

And I'll be honest, I doubt the guy we're using posts from was running max cha, tash/malo, and seriously doubt he used -MR items.

All things aside though I'm glad they finally fixed the quad attacks that all pets gained, charmed or otherwise. That was a huge issue imo.

[Bassracerx]

this is supposed to be an MMO why is soloing so important to so many people?

[Bruman]

this is supposed to be an MMO why is soloing so important to so many people?

My guess is one of these things:

-Sitting LFG can get old quick
-Some people can get more exp this
-Typically more PP
-The WoW generation

Or all of the above.

[ukaking]

All Enchanters that feel cheated, please play a solo warrior. K, thx.
This is a social game, become social.

[quellren]

All Enchanters that feel cheated, please play a solo warrior. K, thx.
This is a social game, become social.

By 'social' you mean 'sit at the zone line and chat with 9 other LFG'ers who can't get a group because theres 84* players in Sebilis and 72* in Karnors?'


*not an exaggeration

[Sethius]

By 'social' you mean 'sit at the zone line and chat with 9 other LFG'ers who can't get a group because theres 84* players in Sebilis and 72* in Karnors?'


*not an exaggeration

By those numbers it sounds like 75 other people in Sebilis and 63 others in Karnors were successfully being social ;)

Only 9 lfg with those numbers seems pretty decent, just sayin ;)

[Evilmog]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I still see QQing here.

[stormlord]

I played a chanter in the OMM missions on live and I play one on projectEQ. I have not played one on p1999.

But I can say from my experience that charming, as it was long ago, from my standpoint, probably wasn't fun. Its uses are too circumstantial. It's too sporadic. If you disagree, try playing a chanter sometime and charming and/or recharming a mob every couple minutes. It's dangerous and not practical. It's not fun unless you're the kind of person that like to do sh** like that over and over and over again like a maniac.

Secondly, my experience in the OMMs taught me that mezzing and crowd control are key factors in whether or not I'm having fun as a chanter, assuming charming isn't an option. It wasn't really an option in the OMM's, for example. It wasn't trustworthy and it was only useful in rare circumstances. So I ended up buffing and doing crowd control. Fortunately, CC was needed a lot in guk and nagafen's lair. It was fun. In those missions, particularly, versatility was important and knowing the dungeon was hte difference between living and dying. Chanters and necromancers were/are very powerful in those circumstances. I saved many groups in OMM's because I was playing a chanter. I wish that kind of gameplay could be repeated here on p1999.

If mezzing and crowd control are removed from the formula, charming, as it's right now, won't be enough to keep a chanter interested. This is my view. This may be the way it was in 1999-01 for chanters, but unless they're mezzing and/or doing crowd control I feel terrible that they have to experience this. I mean, other than crowd control, what is a chanter? A buff bot. That's not fun and makes you feel ignored.

My feeling is SOE or somebody who designed these zones forgot about making chanters useful when they were setting up spawn points and routes and so forth. If a chanter isn't mezzing or doing CC then the chanter is nearly useless. A lot of zones, I've noticed, have too few things going on and chanters are less useful in those cases. If you're deep in a dungeon, on hte other hand, sh** can go wrong fast and a chanter can save your life. This is especially true if you got noobs in your group. Anyway, I think that the CC part of being a chanter is a huge part of the fun and if you're sitting in a group as a chanter with no CCing going on then you're going to be bored and maybe the impractical charming becomes the outlet for the frustrations. I feel bad about this because I played long enough to know how much charming sucks balls.

If I could go back in time I'd increase the duration a great deal on charming, reduce the random breaks (or remove altogether), but cast a debuff on the mob that reduces its dps or hitpoints to offset the potentially game-breaking power of this feature. Bottom line, you can't have a class that's too powerful. You want a mix of things that're fair, but you don't want to have things that're not fun and/or more bothersome than worthwhile. Everyone wants to have their cake even after they've already eaten it. The key is to keep them having fun so they don't give too much attention to the missing piece(s) of cake.

The problem I see with charming is how do you measure whether it's too powerful or not? You have to look at the thing that's charmed, but mobs can be so different from one to the next. A designer might be encouraged to make a simplistic def/atk system to make charming easy to measure, but this would come at teh cost of making it uniform and boring by comparison. But if you have too much diversity among mobs then charming becomes a very non-linear thing which designers, most of them, greatly fear (hard to test it).

Ever seen an undercon? That's one example of the power of charming.

If you're wondering where I'm coming from, go to live and if the OMM's are still available in POK try them. Play as a chanter. You'll see what I mean. You have to mez and CC a lot. It was very fun when I did it in 2010. OMM's are a lot different than classic EQ, but in some ways they're similar. One of the big differences is the pacing and the goal. The goal is to finish asap, so you don't waste your time (try not to). You mez and clear aggro and run. The pace is faster because if you die you start at the zone-in so you quickly learn how to overcome mistakes you make. In old eq, a mistake was expensive. This doesn't mean mistakes don't bite, but the pacing mostly skips over the bite and you're left with the learning part, which I think is the fun part.

OMM's aren't directly transferable to old eq, but something could be learned from it maybe? That's why i've mentioned CCing being important if charming is impractical or not well implemented.