Is Lull not classic?

[Jimjam]

Originally Posted by kjs86z2 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

same graphic op

When slow takes ages to proc, but then “Loading, please wait…” whoops that wasn’t trunch.

[WarpathEQ]

Originally Posted by kjs86z2 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I accidentally (drunkenly?) swapped to my OT hammer instead of Facesmasher before and disappeared on a group.

Lol I remember awhile back our main tank did this in HoT, first pull, and of course he got a first swing proc. We weren't ToV bound back then either....

[Iumuno]

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

Here for more info:

https://project1999.com/forums/showt...=328802&page=5

TL;DR lulls should have unique resist modifiers that are not yet implemented but should come eventually. This will make things more difficult 50+

My personal theory is people in classic remember failing lull a lot because they were trying to lull ~even cons with starter charisma. My research also found that people barely cared about charisma back then. My naked brand new ench on p99 in 2024 was getting like 25% crit lull fails on steamfont kobolds which tracks but if they're saying they found a resist layer they haven't put in we'll see.

What sucks is chanters and necros have ways around this (reverse charming or resetting fights) but pallies/clerics/bards, not so much.

I played an enchanter on live from 2000 and 2004 and if anything, CHA was overvalued. From what I remember, the lull spell line was so unreliable it was to the point of uselessness. Bard lull for some reason worked differently.

As was mentioned elsewhere, this changed during late luclin.