new patch ench charm

[Slave]

Why is this not being mentioned?!

--When you charm something, all other detrimental spells on the mob are dispelled--

Evidence: all root, mez, and snares wear off as soon as charm hits, and the mob trots over to the charm caster with its tail wagging.

Therefore, Tash and Malo DO NOT MATTER except for the initial resist chance of landing charm. If the developers would change charm to not erase all the detrimental effects on the mob, tash and malo would hold and the mob would stay charmed much, much longer. Right?

[Treats]

Originally Posted by Slave [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Why is this not being mentioned?!

--When you charm something, all other detrimental spells on the mob are dispelled--

Evidence: all root, mez, and snares wear off as soon as charm hits, and the mob trots over to the charm caster with its tail wagging.

Therefore, Tash and Malo DO NOT MATTER except for the initial resist chance of landing charm. If the developers would change charm to not erase all the detrimental effects on the mob, tash and malo would hold and the mob would stay charmed much, much longer. Right?

Have you ever charmed anything???

[Kender]

Originally Posted by Treats [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Have you ever charmed anything???

lol that's what i was thinking

[thefloydian]

Originally Posted by nalkin [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Pro~. Well that would explain why I thought it was so long. Though still, if it was not difficult to re-charm then that still seems a bit OP to me. I also think Glitch may be right with what he said below this post about how people know more about what they are doing. It probably wasn't as OP as it used to be because people were still figuring things out, and now with all the pros on here it changes things.

5 min avg I am fine with that and think that is fair. Like I said though, when whirl was pre-nerf watching an enchanter play made me sick to my stomach at how easy it was. So I am still smacking my lips from the bitterness...

Chaining pets is pretty annoying as well.

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[Dalien]

Originally Posted by Slave [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

--When you charm something, all other detrimental spells on the mob are dispelled--

Evidence: all root, mez, and snares wear off as soon as charm hits, and the mob trots over to the charm caster with its tail wagging.

This is not true at all, detrimental effects absolutely stay on the mob during charm. Just snared a wolf to test, charmed it, broke charm with invis, it's still snared. I can't speak for charm duration but detri effects staying on the mob is def classic, used to duo with an enchanter on my druid and keep the pet snared all the time, etc.

[guineapig]

Originally Posted by Slave [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Why is this not being mentioned?!

--When you charm something, all other detrimental spells on the mob are dispelled--

Evidence: all root, mez, and snares wear off as soon as charm hits, and the mob trots over to the charm caster with its tail wagging.

Therefore, Tash and Malo DO NOT MATTER except for the initial resist chance of landing charm. If the developers would change charm to not erase all the detrimental effects on the mob, tash and malo would hold and the mob would stay charmed much, much longer. Right?

Lol, don't I wish. My root always seems to last the longest possible duration when I charm a mob. It's the most annoying thing in the world.

[Malrubius]

Originally Posted by Haynar [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

In classic, everyone did not know that cha was vital to charm, along with tash and malo on the mob.

So if you can come up with a way to make everyone stupid, and not know that info, let me know how to implement it.

H

Sorry to necro rez this thread.

The above surprised me, and I may just be reading too much into it. So...does that mean that you guys are not trying to make the game mechanics purely classic anymore, but just using that as a starting point? And then tweaking the classic mechanics so that the game is more difficult? (to compensate for the fact that we have all played the game before)

Not trying to be snarky, I'm just genuinely curious.

I'd also point out that CHA was never "vital" to Charm in the classic era. It was slightly noticable, but far less important than MR. See #4 in the OP here: http://www.project1999.org/forums/showthread.php?t=6733.

[redghosthunter]

This issue has been beat to death.

I'm as hateful as the next ENC about the changes made, but 99% of what goes on is here excellent. Yes I'm sure there are a select few... (as mentioned in the threads ya posted,) but you going to find that everywhere in everything ya do in life.

[guineapig]

I had charm lasting close to full duration last night multiple times in Seb at guard/necro.
Malo and Tash was used.

Was lot's of fun.

Oh also, I was not wearing my full charisma gear either. Decided to add some cold resist for the wizzies and charisma was at around 218 instead of 255.

I have no idea what people are complaining about. My guess is they don't understand the word "random". I had a very unlucky day with 255 charisma earlier this week and last night I had a very lucky day. It's that simple.

[Malrubius]

I hear ya, and to make it clear, I wasn't complaining at all. I have no idea if charm is currently overpowered or underpowered (or neither) vs. classic.

It was just a general question about whether or not the design (of stuff) is sometimes intentionally changed to compensate for the fact that we are (mostly) intimately familiar with the game.


I also wanted to make it clear that CHA was far from "vital" in classic. It was helpful, but that's about it. A very likely-sounding formula is even in those classic era posts!

Anyway, based on your results gp, it sounds like it might be about right. I'm looking forward to spinning up an Enchanter again.