Spells: Necromancers and Shamans should receive the Charm (anything) line of spells at launch

[DMN]

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

Not to derail but, this brings an interesting question.

Undead charm on a necro, animal charm on a druid/shm etc... dont have a charisma check.

I am wondering if that is due to the class casting the spell, or the spell itself.

If the former, charm will be a tad broken in a number of key camps around the level those spells are available to a necro. If the later, well, human necro with some steins ftw?

Has anyone ever even been able to confirm that necro did NOT have a charisma check? As far as I know this is just a rumor/speculation.

My understanding was always that the charisma check was just more generous for certain classes but it still existed. Necros for instance got a much more generous charisma check on their charisma-linked spells; while enchanters got a much more harsh one. I've discussed this here in the past, as I was totally convinced(and still am) that something is incredibly off with lulls on necromancers.

edit here it is :

https://forums.daybreakgames.com/eq/...arisma.220085/

"Yes it is. It varies on a number of spells to its actual usefulness but it does have a use. There are different levels of charisma for different classes. The system does take into account that an Enchanter should have a higher charisma than say a Necromancer. It's unfair to expect masters of the undead to be entirely charismatic. "

[Quinas]

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

Has anyone ever even been able to confirm that necro did NOT have a charisma check? As far as I know this is just a rumor/speculation.

My understanding was always that the charisma check was just more generous for certain classes but it still existed. Necros for instance got a much more generous charisma check on their charisma-linked spells; while enchanters got a much more harsh one. I've discussed this here in the past, as I was totally convinced(and still am) that something is incredibly off with lulls on necromancers.

edit here it is :

https://forums.daybreakgames.com/eq/...arisma.220085/

"Yes it is. It varies on a number of spells to its actual usefulness but it does have a use. There are different levels of charisma for different classes. The system does take into account that an Enchanter should have a higher charisma than say a Necromancer. It's unfair to expect masters of the undead to be entirely charismatic. "

There is a sizeable group on this forum who will tell you CHA has no effect on charm breaks for Enchanters.

[Dolalin]

https://forums.daybreakgames.com/eq/...arisma.220085/

"Yes it is. It varies on a number of spells to its actual usefulness but it does have a use. There are different levels of charisma for different classes. The system does take into account that an Enchanter should have a higher charisma than say a Necromancer. It's unfair to expect masters of the undead to be entirely charismatic. "

That doesn't seem to be how it works on P99 though.

Druid charms here don't take charisma into account:

https://www.project1999.com/forums/s...ht=druid+charm

This thread seems to agree on Necromancers too:

https://www.project1999.com/forums/s...=131981&page=2

[DMN]

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

That doesn't seem to be how it works on P99 though.

Druid charms here don't take charisma into account:

https://www.project1999.com/forums/s...ht=druid+charm

This thread seems to agree on Necromancers too:

https://www.project1999.com/forums/s...=131981&page=2

Unfortunately it's unlikely you will find much good empirical evidence in there about charming due to natural level variation among the same mobs, magic resist in different mob types, and large duration variation on the charms themselves even if the other two miraculously stay constant. They often don't even have a big stat comparison. Like they think 25 cha points is going to make a "huge" difference or something.

I do remember CHA had a significant impact on my enchanter's vanilla existence for charm/lull/mez and you felt it most when you were doing CR in the naked. It never seemed to matter much on my necro, and that includes lulls. I charmed a bit on my druid, too, but not enough to really speak on how things worked during vanilla or the greater "classic" timeline.

However, that doesn't mean there was no charisma check. The necro might be rolling with d20s, druid d12s, and the enchanter d6s. In fact I'm totally confused by some of the comments and links you posted. They say that they took out the charisma check and that's supposed to be a good thing, yet they also claim you only needed to successfully save on level difference, MR, or CHA . if that's true then removing it as part of the charm save would make the charm worse for druid/necros.

[Dolalin]

Check page two of the druid thread, Uthgaard commented "fixed".

[DMN]

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

Check page two of the druid thread, Uthgaard commented "fixed".

?? still confused.

If all you needed to do is to save on ONE of the three saves (level, MR, Cha) then removing the cha check would make the spell worse.

[Dolalin]

From the thread:

That assumed, there is simply no way to buff charm for druids to be in line with these comments without OPing enchanters unless charm is changed to ignore CHA for druids. This was already done for necros to be in line with classic -- can the same please be done for druids given the overwhelming evidence that CHA had little or no effect on druid charm?

I don't know how much clearer you need it to be man.

The Charisma check is a chance for the *mob* to save against the charm, not for the charmer to *succeed* at the charm. You've got it backwards.

[DMN]

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

From the thread:



I don't know how much clearer you need it to be man.

The Charisma check is a chance for the *mob* to save against the charm, not for the charmer to *succeed* at the charm. You've got it backwards.

Try reading it again.

A: Charisma does not directly affect any spell. Charisma affects what are known as 'saving throws' or 'secondary throws'.

When you cast a charm spell or mesmerise spell, the monster first checks against your level v it's level, then it checks against its resistance, then it checks against your charisma.

With duration spells such as charms, each tick the monster gets a saving throw and this process is repeated. If any one of these checks is successful (ie: you win the roll) then the spell holds.

[Dolalin]

With duration spells such as charms, each tick the monster gets a saving throw and this process is repeated. If any one of these checks is successful (ie: you win the roll) then the spell holds.

This is where you're slipping up. It's not a chance to succeed at the charm, it's a chance to fail at the charm. Or more accurately, the *charmed mob* makes a saving throw every tick against those checks.

Removing the charisma check removes a saving throw for the mob, meaning one less reason the charm can break every tick.

[DMN]

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

This is where you're slipping up. It's not a chance to succeed at the charm, it's a chance to fail at the charm. Or more accurately, the *charmed mob* makes a saving throw every tick against those checks.

Removing the charisma check removes a saving throw for the mob, meaning one less reason the charm can break every tick.

But that's not what It says. It says if you win any of the rolls.

Even if you make a bizarre assumption that the "you" is referring to the monster, why would winning any of those saves/roll successfully keep the spell in place?


Your confusion is confusing.