The Gaardian Aardwolf Notes Archive

display all notes from
on the board
between and
containing the phrase

showing 50 most recent notes by Myrddin
Re: Touchstone clan area exit change. ++
Note #27825
posted on General
Thursday, March 7, 2019 @ 19:53
Reply to: Note 27824 posted by Impurifan

This is just silly. As the MUD changes and areas get built, occasionally
your mapper database will need to be edited in some way to block exits or risk

Nobody's at fault. And corpse retrieval is an option. 

My recommendation, call your insurance network and seek out
a good therapist for your woes.

Re: Your top 1 or 2 ideas to balance classes.
Note #41458
posted on Ideas
Tuesday, March 5, 2019 @ 21:19
Reply to: Note 41428 posted by Lasher

1) Clarify subclass system with weaknesses. Warriors should be beefy
bruisers, bonuses with shield (shield block) are already there. But
despite remorting into caster classes, should be inherently weak against
magic. Pwar maybe had lower base resists, or a hard cap on int/wis below 600.
Same for casters. Mastery over magic should come with some clumsines in the
melee arts. Decrease shield effectiveness (half benefit of damage reduction?), 
perhaps lower resists of physical and hard cap on dex/str/con below 600.

2) Pets. Already have a system in place for them, even conjure elementals with
items.. but remove the exp leech, add mob-level stats to them and limit high
level mobs to specialist subclasses.

Necromancer subclass Ideas...
Note #41425
posted on Ideas
Sunday, March 3, 2019 @ 15:29
The most interesting part of Necromancer at present, is how they
exploit vulnerabilities on undead mobs with the signature spell,
necrocide (and at earlier levels blast/strike undead). However,
this both depends on either a zone build with undead mobs, or use
of the zombify spell, which allows you to tag a mob undead. 
While zombify itself has no lag and allows you to alias that onto
your attack spell seamlessly, the cooldown on it makes it awkward
at best as you gain in power. I propose, rolling the zombify effect
into another spell, which once cast, deals a small amount of damage
per round, and attempts to apply the undead flag to mobs.

New Spell: Aura of death
Syntax: cast 'aura of death'
damage: negative

Necromancers spend their mastery of the unholy arts to gain mastery
over life and death. A skilled Necromancer can learn to drain the life
from their surroundings, wreathing themselves in an aura of death. 

Once cast, this skill is automatic, and provides a chance for extra hits
each round of combat while under the effect of this spell.  If the spell
deals damage, it will sap life from the target turning it undead.  Once
undead, the aura of death will deal damage based on the mobs weakest

Spell available only to Necromancer subclass.
Primary Stat: Int (Damage & Recovery), Wis (Recovery).
Affected by : Luck.

Instinct Bonus: Aura of death instinct will increase the damage done
                by each hit.
(Ideally at maximum stats, downtime would approach zero)
Another area that Necromancers could shine, would be to dive into the
mastery of undead through minions, as spelled out in their description
in 'help necromancer'. I understand there are plenty of variable and
quirks to coding for minions and opportunities for power creep etc.
This said I believe the concept of necromancer is attractive enough
to continue to advocate for it to be fleshed out, so to say. 
Two ideas below on how it might look.
1) as a passive trait of the subclass, ditch the current "bonus"
of detecting who killed an enemy on deathcries, and replace with
a "bonus" of resurrecting the dead for a short period.

Skill/trait: Raise the dead
damage: varies, against undead targets damtype is that of its weakest
resist. against living targets, default to negative (or other?)

With mastery of the undead, a skilled Necromancer gains mastery over
death itself. With each enemy slain, the Necromancer has a chance to
ressurect the fallen enemy as an undead revenant to fight by his side.
Due to the nature of rotting flesh, these revenants only last a short
period of time before crumbling into dust. 

Spell only available to Necromancer subclass.
Primary Stat: Int (damage, duration), Wis (maximum number of revenants)

With max stats, create a limit of say, 5 revenants on a roughly 30
second (1 tick) lifespan. Damage could be along the 
A starting point for damage calculations might look something like
and number of revenant something like MaxRev=ROUNDUP(1+(level-50)/50)
Giving you 2 by lvl 100, 3 by 150 and 5 by the time you hit SH.
Obviously these are spitball numbers and can have damagemodifiers
easily moved around.

Thanks for reading if you made it this far... please post
constructive comments or build on these as you will.
In Memoriam of Taeryn, of Druid.
Note #27749
posted on General
Sunday, January 6, 2019 @ 14:11
It is with a heavy heart that I write this.
On December 17th, 2018 beloved Aardwolf player and
long term Druid member, Taeryn passed away. If you
knew him, or if you did not, I hope you can find it
in you to take a moment aside to remember him. He
has had his character flagged in memoriam, and will
have his name added to the memorial garden soon.

I for one, will always remember his sense of humor.
Sarcasm frequently shrouded his words, with a wit
that could cut through any tension. He was a one-
of-a-kind personality that will deeply be missed.

In Welsh mythology, Annwn is the Otherworld, akin 
to the Christian version of heaven. I know Taeryn
would get himself worked up at times over details
of lore left out of the zone made in it's theme.
May his body be at rest now, and may he find himself
among the Annwn as he imagined it.

With somber memories, Myrddin of Druid
Re: Raiding rewards
Note #1068
posted on Raiding
Monday, October 15, 2018 @ 22:15
Reply to: Note 1066 posted by Quadrapus

I concur with the overall idea, raiding is at it's heart
way more difficult and needs appropriately tuned reward.
I see place for the bonusloot rolling to be tweaked to
produce acceptable quality gear. However, it has always
been a contention that there needs to be some sort of
checks and balances to the system on whole. In retuning
the raid loot, we need more than a 1 month grace window
to prevent free-farming of clans that might not have the
technical know-how to refresh the maze. We have all seen
at points in time where all raiding focuses on 1-2 halls
with "guaranteed breach". I still like the idea of some
put of token system for defense to encourage active satch
combat against the enemies, perhaps with the ability to
roll some bonus stats onto a given piece, up to a maximum
value to be slightly less than the raider rewards.

I don't know how the logistics would work, but all things
in balance...

Heavenly balance death message
Note #37081
posted on Ideas
Wednesday, March 29, 2017 @ 15:08
Being a final attack spell for ppal, could use some spicing up.
Currently reads as follows: 
[1] Your heavenly balance does UNIMAGINABLE things to X [1338]
An adolescent crystal spider is DEAD!!

Perhaps something along these lines would be appropriate:
[1] Your heavenly balance does UNIMAGINABLE things to X [1338]
$N is torn asunder by heavenly light! It is DEAD!!

Pray for salvation
Note #36759
posted on Ideas
Tuesday, February 7, 2017 @ 08:07
Proposed new spell for harmer subclass, to compliment the current
'pray for damnation'.

Help Keywords : 'Pray for Salvation'.
Help Category : Enhancement.
Related Helps : alignment.
Last Updated  : 2012-09-16 16:47:02.
Syntax:  cast 'pray for salvation' 

Through attonement, the harmer may regain the good grace of his/her god. 
Rather than the blood price of damnation, great mental energy is expended.
If the caster does not have enough mand to sacrifice, their prayers are
ignored. For a cost of 3 mana per alignment shift, the harmer's 
alignment will be set to +2500. This means that only larger players can
move from -2500 to +2500 as it requires a 15,000 mana sacrifice.

This is a harmer subclass skill.

Primary Stat - Wisdom.
Re: Aarchaeology Information
Note #26934
posted on General
Wednesday, February 1, 2017 @ 16:00
Reply to: Note 26919 posted by Rhuli

Happy day, Rhuli!

-I have no ring yet
-Started collecting when they came out
-Have been avoiding purchasing from market en masse, seeing how long it takes
to get without that. Although I have purchased 3 or 4 of my 42 unique items,
and done bartered trades for same-reward pieces that I was missing.
-No relics as of yet.
tracker [Repop] druid @@ 16:03:12
-Drop rates could probably use tweaking, although I think the aspect that is
tricky is that some pieces just seem super rare and others are seen in droves
on the market. 

My feedback and 2 cents. :)

Re: cp targeting and area level range ++
Note #35100
posted on Ideas
Friday, April 8, 2016 @ 08:48
Reply to: Note 35097 posted by Fiendish

in the help accelerate file, it suggests that any instinct in 'haste' will
lend full benefit to accelerate, and I have found this to be true through

As for wearing aardboots, it will then treat your haste as 100% trained for
purposes of instinct.

Hope this helps
TPenchanted Dagger of Aardwolf Lvl 120
Note #46645
posted on Forsale
Thursday, April 7, 2016 @ 08:14
lbid 68992

| Keywords   : aardwolf dagger (371599)                           |
| Name       : Dagger of Aardwolf                                 |
| Id         : 1262931298                                         |
| Type       : Weapon                    Level  :   120           |
| Worth      : 1,000                     Weight :    10           |
| Wearable   : wield                                              |
| Score      : 2120                                               |
| Flags      : unique, glow, hum, magic, solidified, resonated,   |
|            : illuminated, V3, precious, lauction                |
| Owned By   : Myrddin                                            |
| Found at   : Immortal Homes                                     |
| Weapon Type: whip                   Average Dam :    360        |
| Inflicts   : light                  Damage Type : Light         |
| Specials   : sharp                                              |
| Stat Mods  : Damage roll  : +60      Hit roll     : +63         |
|              Wisdom       : +2       Strength     : +1          |
|              Luck         : +3                                  |
| Market Item Number    : 68992                                   |
| Item is being sold by : Myrddin                                 |
| Auction will end in   : 5 days and 08:43:42                     |
| Buyout Price          : 4,650                                   |
| Current bid           : 11 qp (Mannec)                          |
TPenchanted Axe lv 231
Note #46644
posted on Forsale
Thursday, April 7, 2016 @ 08:01
lbid 68924

| Keywords   : axe aardwolf (358244)                              |
| Name       : Axe of Aardwolf                                    |
| Id         : 1003302346                                         |
| Type       : Weapon                    Level  :   231           |
| Worth      : 1,000                     Weight :     2           |
| Wearable   : wield                                              |
| Score      : 4072                                               |
| Flags      : unique, glow, hum, magic, solidified, resonated,   |
|            : V3, precious, lauction                             |
| Owned By   : Myrddin                                            |
| Found at   : Immortal Homes                                     |
| Weapon Type: axe                    Average Dam :    693        |
| Inflicts   : mind force             Damage Type : Mental        |
| Specials   : vorpal                                             |
| Stat Mods  : Damage roll  : +115     Hit roll     : +117        |
|              Wisdom       : +2       Dexterity    : +5          |
|              Luck         : +2       Strength     : +1          |
|              Intelligence : +1                                  |
| Market Item Number    : 68924                                   |
| Item is being sold by : Myrddin                                 |
| Auction will end in   : 1 day and 05:52:56                      |
| Buyout Price          : 11,750                                  |
| Current bid           : 7,534 qp (Jegeas)                       |
Re: Slit +++
Note #35018
posted on Ideas
Monday, March 28, 2016 @ 15:59
Reply to: Note 35016 posted by Redryn

My take on it, is that the slit/disintigrate/banish mechanism for GQ and CP
targets was to allow a clever way to identify a target, since they are not
flagged. In Quests, the flag tells you which target to attack...

Sure the occasional foul-up is annoying, but there are two entirely different
mechanisms in play, and it was deliberately designed.

I think adding a blanket-all mechanism for all things would lead to even more
mindless automation or atuomated behavior.

While it might seem harmless, it could also be seen as a slippery slope down
full mash single button road for all things.

Re: Hammerswing +++++
Note #34941
posted on Ideas
Sunday, March 13, 2016 @ 17:43
Reply to: Note 34940 posted by Quadrapus

And yet, Lasher has stated publically that blacksmith is an issue. perhaps 
he was thinking tempering was the issue?
Re: Hammerswing +++
Note #34939
posted on Ideas
Sunday, March 13, 2016 @ 17:32
Reply to: Note 34938 posted by Visionaire

Regardless of how we'd like to angle the conversation, Lasher has voiced
his concerns that blacksmith needs addressing. It's he said/she said right now
as to which aspect needs addressing, but I'd wager that it's neither a purely
group nor a purely solo issue, but likely the fact that it currently has
INFINITE scaling, and is NOFAIL.

If you tone down the mechanics to the scaling, via a modifier that diminishes
the output with growing room size, that seems to solve part of the issue, and
hit's groups and solo alike.

As for epics... that's a whole different task to address, given the way they
have been designed, it's not going to be an easy way to tackle smith, nor do
I suspect Lasher wants to tune a class specifically around the specifics of
epic runs.

Note #34929
posted on Ideas
Saturday, March 12, 2016 @ 22:40
How about, for a relatively easy code fix to the problem,
rather than trying to reinvent the wheel... 
Hammerswing deals a base amount of damage, calculated by
user strength/dex/weapon damage, then divide this total
by the number of mobs hit. Can put simple multipliers in
place to tweak the output, and would make it more desirable
in smaller groups... and can then quickly adjust the
coding as needed if it's under/overwhelming.

Re: runto death manor doesn't work +++
Note #15502
posted on Typos
Wednesday, February 24, 2016 @ 21:48
Reply to: Note 15500 posted by Nuanse

runto death's manor

Re: Taskforce on Raiding ++++++
Note #1006
posted on Raiding
Monday, February 1, 2016 @ 16:42
Reply to: Note 1005 posted by Tsubaki

Speaking of preaching inaccuracies... You claim clearly to know who has
and hasn't tried anything.

That is more than enough to clearly spell out that your own statements are
fueled entirely by speculation and understanding of your own personal bubble.

We could go back and forth all day on he-said she-said. End of the road would
be hearsay and happenstance. Which is not at all what this thread began as. 
We are data driven here right? And lasher has data on that says the testraid
rework has been a disapointment so far... for whatever reason. This seems to
suggest in itself that *something* is preventing it from being a success
story. And I guarantee you it's not ignorance as has been waved repeatedly.
And it's not for lack of trying - I have emails dating back to the summer of
people looking for interested testraiders.

I'm not sure why it is felt to be appropriate or constructive to continue
pressing for the same arguments time and time again.

Re: Taskforce on Raiding ++++
Note #1002
posted on Raiding
Sunday, January 31, 2016 @ 22:08
Reply to: Note 1001 posted by Lasher

The time and effort put into revamping the testraid
options was phenomenal. But with all due respect, I
don't think it's fair to state that the lack of ways
to practice was THE reason people stated raiding was
dead, nor have anything to do with why people make
statements about raiding system having problems with
it now. I think it was a component of some dissent, 
and perhaps partly created out of the vocal powers 
repeating the mantra of "you don't have any right to
make claims until you try and succeed."

With that piece of the equation expertly crafted and
put in place, why are there still claims even made?
I think there are probably much smaller tweaks that
could be made to keep raiding lively for years to
come without requiring another massive code under-
taking. The creativity shown through epic content to
date shows that this community has plenty of ideas
to work with that might spur "out of the box" solutions,
if it were to come down to that. I was clearly wrong
to think that anything beyond a litany of posts was
worth pursuing. I have since received tells from
individuals denigrating me in what they thought to
be witty remarks. Way to keep it classy.

Re: Taskforce on Raiding +
Note #1000
posted on Raiding
Saturday, January 30, 2016 @ 16:42
Reply to: Note 999 posted by Tsubaki

This is the exact sort of denigrating commentary that
surfaces quickly whenever the topic of change is brought
up.. which only serves as a superficial defense for a
lack of reasoning why it's bad to even look for a way
forward rather than the status quo.

Back to the heart of it, and tackling what Bugsy inquired
I guess I pictured it as a way to come together and lobby
for any positive changes that might be found, in a unified
rather than scattered voice. It may well be that this is
the best system we are going to get, but risk/benefits are
where the lobbying ends up.

Or perhaps as has been stated, I'm just ignorant and
should keep my words to myself. However, that sentiment
doesn't really belong here.

Re: Taskforce on Raiding +++
Note #995
posted on Raiding
Saturday, January 30, 2016 @ 15:07
Reply to: Note 994 posted by Quadrapus

I think a solid think tank would consist of people with experience as
well as those without. You kind of need to get input and feedback from
both sides in order to make informed decisions.

Data has it's role, as does perception. In order to tackle any perceived
issues, you must know what those perceptions are.
Re: Taskforce on Raiding +
Note #993
posted on Raiding
Saturday, January 30, 2016 @ 14:49
Reply to: Note 992 posted by Quadrapus

I wasn't claiming it was a dead system. I was stating that it's a sentiment
that has been voiced on numerous occasion. I feel this stems more from the
fact that the system has some serious issues that can be addressed in a
positive manner moving forward.

Please take the time to read and consider notes before responding. This is
undeniably a area of debate over the years, and something I think warrants some
good think-tanking.

Taskforce on Raiding
Note #991
posted on Raiding
Saturday, January 30, 2016 @ 11:52
I have seen multiple comments from all sides of the aisle that "raiding
is dead"... yet what I think we are all trying to get at, is that the
raiding system is broken. The current reworked system served us for a
time period, but the game has overshot the design in terms of character
power and raid structure.

I'd like to propose that we collectively identify the areas that need 
to be fixed, with the eventual goal of forming a Committee on Raiding, 
to collaborate on ways to tackle the problem at hand. There have been
spontaneous discussions in the past, but they have all ended in a stand
off between raiding and defending, and who wants what specific change.

For this to work, it would require minds from both sides putting aside
solutions to begin with, and identifying target problems to solve then
working through each one deliberately and with an open mind. Is there
any interest in coming together on this or am I in a twisted reality
of my own here? :P

Re: Hardcore change proposal ++
Note #34424
posted on Ideas
Thursday, January 21, 2016 @ 12:02
Reply to: Note 34423 posted by Koala

Sure, that technically does the trick, but should the hardcore
exist to stimulate PK or not, would be the question at heart.

If it is to stimulate PK, you would hope it would be restricted in
some meaningful range that somebody flagged could reasonably defend
or retaliate, no?

Keeping it <199 might pan out that way, might not. Correct me if I'm
mistaken though, but after 20-25 level disadvantage, a PK target is going
to stand a strand of a chance to fight back.
Maybe +30-40 levels would be appropriate, with increased risk of
inescapable deaths, with some hope at tactical retreats and escape within
a strand of health.

tracker [Repop] stuff @@ 12:07:46
If hardcore is supposed to merely be a gauntlet style challenge in which
we see how far we can go before death, and encourage sneaking around or
long periods of inactivity to "wait out" the hunters, then the open-ended
range makes more sense.

I guess it's a fundamental identity issue?

Re: Hardcore change proposal
Note #34422
posted on Ideas
Thursday, January 21, 2016 @ 11:55
Reply to: Note 34421 posted by DjDoodles

In addition, having an extended level range for PK, (without the SH
tracker [Repop] druid @@ 11:56:48
interference), may increase overall PK activities throughout the
level ranges. 

Encouraging more players to participate in hardcore by removing the
frustration of having the SH hunters, and the SH spammer/triggers
take you out before lvl 20 does very little to stimulate the activity.
However, if you have a larger player base willing to join in, 
you would hope to see this manifest in more mid-range levels with
viable targets.

Seems like a win-win for the system, rather than a "gauntlet run
through the SHs".

Re: thief suggestions +++++++
Note #34295
posted on Ideas
Saturday, January 9, 2016 @ 13:35
Reply to: Note 34293 posted by Redryn

This topic is actually pretty old. And at some point in the past it was brought
up as a possible affect applied by spiral to the primary target

Obviously, as you pointed out, this offers little in additional speed for pups,
but IIRC the concern of pthiefs that were bringing this up wasn't pup speed,
but rather a way to remain competitive for damage brought to the table in epic
and PK scenarios.

IMHO, cloning hammerswing mechanic to pthief would be a silly approach here,
and would simply have 2 flavors of the same, melee-centric puppers.
Rather than that, having it as a DOT debuff that even perhaps stacks to a
preset maximum number, might be a nice way to add variety to melee options, and
a new option for PK.

Clearly it would take some balancing, but that's another issue entirely.
Re: Rules for Enchanting.
Note #26265
posted on General
Monday, January 4, 2016 @ 08:05
Reply to: Note 26236 posted by Lasher

I think it's sad that we are forced to re-engineer all new
thoughts around "how do we account for bots".. but so be it.
Let us first acknowledge that bots are a problem at current,
else this is a moot point. Let us then acknowledge that they
remain a problem because they can evade detection with some
level of troubling consistency. Why then are we going to
make a task that is mind-numbingly tedious to perfect for
the vast majority of players, in order to make bot writers
work a little harder up front in order to evade? Are we
hoping to merely catch a few bad apples at the cost of
headaches to many?

I think adding a small xp value to successful casts of
enchants is a brilliant idea to add some incentive. I don't
think  you're going to see bots suddenly topping pup charts
even if you put in modest rewards for it. The market should
be able to control this to some extent as well - if a bot
churns out 100 x Widget, it is highly unlikely they are going
to find buyers for the majority of this. They might sell a
few dozen and make a slight profit, but I'd bet the amount
of gold coming in would still be higher by the ones killing
mobs for the faster pup-style as well.

I also think, that if the overall aim here is to encourage
and reward alternative playstyles, there are plenty of ways
to do this outside of crafting xp. Thematic combat spells
could see enchanters being masters of the arcane flinging
unique spells, or beside enchanted floating weapons. (can
do this through a damage-per-round style of spell like
ctest of faith etc operate on... or more ellaborate) but
This is a topic for another thread i think.


TLDR - Don't hamstring majority of players to try to thwart
some bad apples. XP for crafting success could be nice, and
there are other ways to invigorate these subclasses. I don't
see stacking as the problem - good scripts will not stack.
Re: building-related helpfiles +++
Note #33874
posted on Ideas
Wednesday, December 2, 2015 @ 17:50
Most of this information is available online, at
You just have to hunt for it a little. Look under area building and
under lua coding for starters, between the two sub-pages you'll find
a plethora of info on how and why.

I'm apt to agree that it would be info-overload for a majority of players
and time poorly spent for the imms that would have to maintain the help files

That said, I imagine if you are truly interested in the behind-the-scenes
aspects, getting involved in building is not that hard to do... check out the
help-files on building, and the appropriately cited url for more information.
Or, make friends with somebody who builds and they can help you through the
information stream you seek.

Re: gquest quit +++
Note #33400
posted on Ideas
Sunday, September 20, 2015 @ 22:19
Reply to: Note 33399 posted by Tsubaki

The point isn't that it's not clear, it's a request for confirm command.
Seems reasonable enough.

Re: Miracle
Note #33377
posted on Ideas
Friday, September 18, 2015 @ 15:57
Reply to: Note 33376 posted by Nuanse

Add Lifechant as well.
Re: Strike undead cast message +
Note #33371
posted on Ideas
Wednesday, September 16, 2015 @ 21:38
Reply to: Note 33370 posted by Daresia

directly from help necromancer: 
   Masters of the undead, Necromancers are experts in everything
   unholy. With their minions at their command, Necromancers make 
   fearsome adversaries.

masters of undead. experts in everything unholy.

Strike undead cast message
Note #33368
posted on Ideas
Wednesday, September 16, 2015 @ 19:55
[2] Your deadly force does UNSPEAKABLE things to a confused shopper! [679]

'deadly force' is the same description used for paladin's terminate... and
doesn't feel right somehow.

perhaps something along the line of
[2] Your unholy strike does UNSPEAKABLE things to n! [679]

just a thought, and improved flavor for necromancer spells.
tracker [Repop] hedge @@ 19:59:30
Aardwords formatting issue
Note #15302
posted on Typos
Saturday, September 12, 2015 @ 01:52
Not a typo really, but couldn't think of where else to put this...
with the identification formating, double word and double letter tiles drop
a colorcode as shown below. Simple fix. :)

| Keywords   : words aardwords tile coins -dws-                   |
| Name       : AardWords (TM) - Double Word Score - Position 2,   |
|            : 4, or 6 in Word                                    |
| Id         : 1512709666                                         |
| Type       : Treasure                  Level  :     1           |
| Worth      : 0                         Weight :     1           |
| Wearable   : hold                                               |
| Score      : 0                                                  |
| Material   : plastic                                            |
| Flags      : glow, hum, magic, held, burn-proof, nolocate,      |
|            : auctioned, nosteal, iskey, static                  |
| Notes      : This item is from a clan hall.                     |
| Keywords   : words aardwords tile coins -dls-                   |
| Name       : AardWords (TM) - Double Letter Score - Position 1, |
|            : 3, 5, or 7 in Word                                 |
| Id         : 1533911816                                         |
| Type       : Treasure                  Level  :     1           |
| Worth      : 0                         Weight :     1           |
| Wearable   : hold                                               |
| Score      : 0                                                  |
| Material   : plastic                                            |
| Flags      : glow, hum, magic, held, burn-proof, nolocate,      |
|            : auctioned, nosteal, V3, iskey, static              |
| Notes      : This item is from a clan hall.                     |

The Great Circle of Druids Welcomes You
Note #22
posted on Claninfo
Sunday, September 6, 2015 @ 22:48

       # #### ####           *A breeze kicks up as you pass by a sacred
    ### \/#|### |/####       grove. As the trees rustle a voice emerges*
   ##\/#/ \||/##/_/##/_#     
   ###  \/###|/ \/ # ###     Greetings adventurer! We have been watching
 ##_\_#\_\## | #/###_/_####  your progress from the saftey of our woods,
## #### # \ #| /  #### ##/## and wish to extend you a branch, should you
 __#_--###`  |{,###---###-~  be brave enough to take it.
           \ }{     
  GREAT     }}{     Visit our website at to learn more
   CIRCLE   }}{     about us, paying attention to joining requirements.
  OF DRUIDS {{}     
       , -=-~{ .-^- _ Once you find your way along the path, and wish to
            `}     apply, write a note on personal board to 'Druid' 
             {'    (no s!). In your note, please express your interest in
             }     Druid as well as what you hope to bring to the clan and
             {     what you expect to gain from becoming a Druid.
                   Feel free to contact our members to get to know us.
                        -Myrddin, Hierophant of Druid

Re: Three Moons and enchants ++++
Note #33307
posted on Ideas
Friday, September 4, 2015 @ 05:44
Reply to: Note 33304 posted by Starphoenix

I see your points in wanting to have mystery in the game. However, as somebody
who has sat enchanter in the past, and went far enough to make an alt to
provide the ongoing services to friends and clannies, will attest it can more
often than not cease to be a mystery, and begin to be a source of great

As for how they are working, I appreciate the feedback... it's in line with
past hypotheses I have shared.

I agree that there doesn't need to be a completel unveiling of the effect,
but a subtle "hey guess what, something happened!" would be a tintalizing
reminder that those who spend hours a day doing this are not completely
out of their skulls.... or maybe we are :P

Three Moons and enchants
Note #33300
posted on Ideas
Thursday, September 3, 2015 @ 10:31
I have long heard discussions as to the relative merits (or not) of
3 moons, and their impact on enchanting.

I have also noticed that some subclass spells clearly communicate with
the caster when they get a bonus from the 3 moons effect... power projection
and wolf spirits are two that come readily to mind.

I would like to petition that the mystery behind 3moons enchants
be illucidated ever so slighlty, with a simple: "The three moons bestow power
to your enchant!".... if and when there is an actual effect :P

Wraith Form tweak
Note #33244
posted on Ideas
Tuesday, August 25, 2015 @ 06:19
Got to thinking when I saw ''X' is no longer one with the undead.' msg when
dampening wraith form on a mob.
Then from reading Help Wraith Form:
Syntax: cast 'wraith form'
Through the use of this spell the caster can assume the abilities of one
of the undead. This spell is most useful when preparing for a major battle.
A caster who is both wise and intelligent has a chance of improving his
stats with the casting of this spell.
Spell available only to the Primary Class Mages.
Primary stat: Intelligence, Wisdom.
Affected by : Luck.
I suggest a minor addenedum to add the undead flag when casting this spell.
It should have minimal impact, but add a bit of interesting interplay.

New Spell Ideas: Bond of Afterlife, Raise Army
Note #33222
posted on Ideas
Sunday, August 23, 2015 @ 16:06
Couple of New spell ideas for Necromancer, to help fulfil their niche as
stated in help necromancer:
   Masters of the undead, Necromancers are experts in everything
   unholy. With their minions at their command, Necromancers make 
   fearsome adversaries.
Help Keywords : 'Bond of Afterlife'.
Help Category : Enhancement
Syntax: cast 'bond of afterlife'

Through mastery of the dark arts, necromancers can reach across the veil
between this world and the afterlife, forming a temporary bond with spirits
beyond. They draw upon this power to aide them in combat.
Once this spell is cast, the player will have at least one extra attack per
round.  This attack deals negative damage, as spirits from the veil draw
life from your foes and lend it to the necromancer who commands them. 
This ability is automatic for the entire duration of the spell, but after
drawing upon the dark magic, the caster will be unable to use the spell
for a short period.
Spell available only to the Primary Class Necromancer.
Primary Stat: Intellect (Damage and life leeched), Wisdom (cooldown).
Affected by : Luck (number of attacks).
Instinct Bonus: Bond of the Afterlife increases damage dealt.

This would be easily adjust to find the right balance of damage output and
life leech, while adding some unique utility to the "masters of the undead".

Alternatively, focusing on their role as commanding minions to do their
Help Keywords : 'Raise Army'.
Help Category : Followers
Syntax: cast 'raise army'

Skilled necromancers call upon their mastery of death to raise an unholy
army to assist them in combat.
This ability allows the caster to summon 1-X number of fiendish ghouls that
follow him/her and fight alongside. With greater mastery of the dark arts,
master necromancers can command increased number of ghouls. 
Fiendish ghouls follow the caster for a short period of time before the
magic that raised them fades, and they crumble to dust.
Spell available only to the Primary Class Necromancer.
Primary Stat: Intellect (Damage).
Affected by : Wisdom (Cooldown or duration of ghoul).
I suppose to simplify coding, this spell too, could be filled in as an 
on-hit effect, although the ambiance would be quite different.

Death Field Spell idea
Note #33211
posted on Ideas
Saturday, August 22, 2015 @ 18:07

Among area of effect spells, some such as fire breath and toxic cloud stand
out with their ability to blind, burn eq, or poison as secondary effects.
These are modest, and thematically fit with the spells at hand. Death field,
however, sounds pretty wicked and could fit nicely  into the Necromancer
subclass kit... except it's pretty much just thematic without the bite as
it were. I suggest adding an effect of death field to add the undead flag
to targets. 
New helpfile potentially:
~Help Keywords : 'Death Field'.
~Help Category : Attack Spell
Syntax: cast 'death field'
Damage: negative

A 'death field' is a life-sapping region of negative energy.  Only adept
psionicists can use this power. The death field moves out from the psionicist
and envelops every mobile in the room. Those who still follow the dark arts
of necromancy still use this ancient spell as a means to strike a severe 
blow to all monsters in their immediate area. In the wrong hands, it's been
reported to turn mobs undead.

Primary stat: Wisdom
Affected by : Intelligence, Luck, Tier of caster.
Re: Killstealing - code/remove policy ++++
Note #33092
posted on Ideas
Saturday, August 8, 2015 @ 12:33
Reply to: Note 33069 posted by Visionaire

Helpfile on Kill Stealing couldn't be clearer about your worries of 
"marking mobs" wit wounded flag.

Paragraph 2: "If a player wounds a second mob without killing the first,
his/her rights to the first mob are gone."

And, furthermore, Last Paragraph:" Keep in mind that MUD etiquette exists
alongside mud rules, if, for example,  you come into a room where another
player is obviously preparing to fight a mob and you attack the (unwounded)
mob regardless, you are not breaking rules, but you ARE being rude. Your
attitude will go a long way in defining how other players treat you in the

and I think this last sentence might get to the heart of why this conversation
is even occuring.

Re: PK and stuff ++++
Note #32157
posted on Ideas
Sunday, May 24, 2015 @ 12:39
Reply to: Note 32156 posted by Veswar

Would it be feasible, simple and make sense to break away from the v1 level
range ideology to PK targetting?  What I think might be an approach worth
considering, would be total stat differences - This would pan out pretty well
for both 1-200 and at SH sitters if tweaked right. A high tier in leveling
range typically has copious amounts of stats compared to lower tiers and t0s,
so perhaps something on the magnitude of "can initiate PK with players within
100 stats" (this number should be what gets tweaked to work right, and is
completely random right now).

This might allow the lower tiers who spend a lot of time beefing up their
character to compete with higher tiers, and then at SH level, would also
serve to protect the newly arrived 800-900 stat SH from the t9+x with 2k stats.

Possibilities here in my head anyway... can even combine it with level checks
for a more comlex algorithm if desired.

'Who Redo' listing
Note #31966
posted on Ideas
Wednesday, April 22, 2015 @ 04:37
With as much discussion as there is about the popularity of T9 redo, or lack
thereof, it might be nice to be able to monitor how many people are actually
doing it, at a glance.

who redo -> lists all players 1-200 on a t9 redo cycle

or some iteration of this *shrug*

CP Tweak idea, no increase in total CPs.... +++
Note #31877
posted on Ideas
Tuesday, April 14, 2015 @ 04:36
Reply to: Note 31875 posted by Cirrus

I smell a need for "intervention" brewing. :P

In all seriousness though, I think Lasher has been more than generous
with the lifting of previous restrictions on redo CPs. And like he stated
himself, infinite QPs should not be the answer, yet it already sort of is for
those who want to put in 20 hours "at the keyboard" per day.

Getting extra perks of TPs/bonus trains/pracs after 20 cps per day on redo was
explicitly limited in changes publicly some time ago, IIRC. And the logic used
at the time is no less true today.

Re: Factions? ++
Note #831
posted on Raiding
Saturday, March 14, 2015 @ 14:53
Reply to: Note 825 posted by Lasher

| I posted this personal to a few people but no reason it can't be here. For
| those who *really* design mazes that are hard to crack, is having code
| generated mazes that are the same, or close enough, a practical option?

I never claim to be in the group described, but I have spent plenty of time
working on maze designs. The issue of "hard to cracK" revolves highly on if
there are defenders to keep it that way or not.

The current system of designing mazes has so many limitations and caveats to
work with, that I 110% believe that there is no "hard to crack" design without
bodies at the gates to keep it from being worked through.

That being said, some sort of code that would allow similar generations
based on a set design, might be tremendous difference in making a harder to
crack challenge. We used to have random reload portal resets many years
back, and those made navigation much much tougher than it is now. I don't
know if that's the easiest answer, but I'd be very interested in working
through this idea further.

Defensive reward, raiding incentive. ++++
Note #676
posted on Raiding
Thursday, March 5, 2015 @ 12:26
Reply to: Note 674 posted by Quadrapus

We seem to want to angle our discussion to the most devious acts we can
think of, yet focus this pessimism on the intentions of defenders.

To the best of my imagination, I cannot see where somebody could feasibly
create alts every few weeks and create a raid party targetting their allies.
This completely overlooks the clanally mechanics as they exist today.

And if we want to discuss players working the system over to get rewards
that they don't put in work for, we probably need to look into several
instances where raiders join a party, and spend 99% of the raid time sitting
in their clanhall or manor, waiting for the main group to breach the hall, and
then get escorted through the maze having little more experience with the
raid past typing 'invade up'.

I think counting on the worst human behavior from defenders is little more
than a rouse to sway our views of possible merit to the many ideas put out
there to incentivize both sides instead of one.

I think there has been many suggestions that could work in tandem to answer
some of your other questions, such as limiting in-clan defenders - there would
presumably be a flag associated with those who participated, and they would
be getting the rewards.

This entire thread is highly speculative of course, due to the lack of imm
concern about the current system, and that we devolve quickly into bickering
amongst ourselves and pointing fingers.

Re: Suggested Raiding Changes +
Note #649
posted on Raiding
Saturday, February 28, 2015 @ 20:59
Reply to: Note 647 posted by Nokian

I think this conversation ties into another topic of discussion recently,
that is the option to have limited internal defenders at any given time.
Perhaps, taking out this artificial guard lag at the same time as working
on a fixed number of defenders would be a good way to balance the field
for both sides. On the one, defense builders can work with more reliable
engages from guards, to eliminate stacked command and skip tactics... on
the other, it would allow the raiders more consistent numbers to face.

Of course, if limiting internal defenders to some set number that can
be in the maze, it would probably be fair to entertain a raid party size
limit.... I have a feeling that all of these aspects are a hotly debated
concern from whichever side you want to argue from. 

Re: Global Quest win totals ++
Note #31608
posted on Ideas
Sunday, February 22, 2015 @ 15:24
Reply to: Note 31607 posted by Erosuri

I should have color coded key lines i think. There was a suggestion
for a 30 per month cap, which could obviously be tweaked to a "fair"
number. This seems hardly detrimental to those who GQ sit. 
And presumably, those doing that are doing it for the QP income, right?
They can continue to grow their QP pool through all but the bonus for

Then the big aspect, was that there's an aspect of helping to self-
regulate the policy about spending 'inhuman' amounts of time on the
game, and winning 24 hrs a day. Suspicious of something here that would
not be in the spirit of competition anyway, but more of scripting.

Global Quest win totals
Note #31604
posted on Ideas
Sunday, February 22, 2015 @ 15:12
This is clearly going to be a controversial suggestion, but try to bring
yourself to think about it rationally, and leave egos and defense mechanisms
out of this for the sake of discussion.

Would it make sense to cap GQ wins? Say, 30 wins per month, or maybe
1000 lifetime wins? Anything beyond that, you could still participate and
get the 3 qps per kill, but not receive the win? Both seem rasonable caps
that allow the competitive GQers to rack in the wins still, and gives newer
players more time to attempt a win and get the ego boost of doing so.

My thought process here follows a few paths:
nevermind the hypotheticals of if scripts, search & destroy, etc etc are 
fair, fun, or whatever... it would give those at the bottom of the
totem pole to climb the power ranks. Will this level the playing field in
any long term? Maybe.. but not likely.. what it will do is make it a 
minutely smaller power gap and encourage newer players to continue to 
attempt to compete against the incredibly fast GQers.  The rich get richer
situationthat is in place now, doesnt' offer much hope.

Furthermore, this seems to backup and support the "Rule 15" aspect, of
encouraging a healthy balance of play time. Somebody winning GQs 'round 
the clock and pulling ridiculous numbers in on a regular basis, is a
good target for intervention under the new policy anyway... this would
add a layer to help sefl-police the matter and take some policing out
of the hands of Imms, so that they can spend their time and effort on
other aspects of game development.

Flame on. Myrd.
Combined Heal messages
Note #15550
posted on Bugs
Sunday, February 22, 2015 @ 13:53
You quaff a luminescent vial.
[4] Toxik TearNyne heals himself. [1092]

TearNyne wasn't in room/area/etc ether.

Re: Skills
Note #25135
posted on General
Wednesday, February 18, 2015 @ 17:03
Reply to: Note 25133 posted by Katori

Absolutely possible. Enchanters Focus only gives you the chance to
repeat a failed enchantment.. and not every time. This means you get
the results you want with fewer items attempted, but you don't get
access to any "special" enchants per se. 
I know a pthief who produces high quality enchants, comparable to
what I was able to produce as a maxxed enchanter... only I spent
far less gold and time doing so.

Re: Web at high-end SH PK. (cross post) ++
Note #31561
posted on Ideas
Monday, February 16, 2015 @ 12:28
Reply to: Note 31560 posted by Mercutio

Making PK a 1 v 1 would not make it any more fair that it is now.

It would however, make those in the more powerful eschelons worry
a little less about having a real "fair fight" occur when the numbers
it takes to effectively handle them show up.

And I imagine the biggest ones out there, would agree that this
would be an undesireable change.

There is no easy way to "level the field" here... and I'm thinking
it may be more worth our time to envision end-game activities that
require less brute force, and more skill, puzzle solving, or just
plain desire to have fun.

There was a good deal of conversation at one stage about a sort of
"Rogue" like tower challenge. Perhaps the idea can be further
explored, and adapted to an end-game PVP challenge...
Maybe even a tower-siege, where 1 party takes time to explore
a small section looking for defense buffs and items, while another
unlocks sieging devices and weapons. Then after a set-time
or a particular completion task, the two sides go head to
head, with one attempting to breech the defensive structures
unlocked. Then swap sides and go again.

..May have drifted off topic. *shrug*