Forgotten Kingdoms Forums

Tarven wrote:If you don't like it, try playing a class that requires effort.

I like being lazy. I am the laziest of the lazies.

Insinuating that playing a fighter takes no effort is a very large statement to make about a broad swath of our player base. I like to think that it's more than a lazy excuse to play a class.

Back on topic, I would prefer making other additions over removing currently-coded benefits. I understand our will as a playerbase to get onto the SRD bandwagon, but SRD will not have all of our answers, and I don't think removing grip and fifth attack will move us anywhere closer to a happy mix of classes. I think we should focus on adding things for other classes (rogues/thieves especially) over taking away abilities and skills that players have come to love. For grip, understandably, the offer of a locked gauntlet is very appealing - I would see this as a "remove one, add another to take its place" stand, and I like it. Let's not take away things, but rather tweak and add things as we need to give classes diversity and move them closer (albeit not slavishly so) to SRD.

I've said my piece, and I'm tired of repeating myself. You absolutely will not convince me that there is a necessity for fighters to have grip, nor fifth attack. You have plenty of other advantages, even above and beyond SRD. If you don't like it, try playing a class that requires effort.

Luckily we do not have to convince you. I am pretty sure the imms, and staff make the decisions on this.

As for the need of grip and fifth attack, have you tried playing a fighter? I'm sorry but years of training, and training, and training I do not agree with you. Fighters are not completely the EASIEST. You can't have a fighter level 50 with no skills trained up. You have to train them constantly to get to a point where they are even decent.

Tarven wrote: I've said my piece, and I'm tired of repeating myself. You absolutely will not convince me that there is a necessity for fighters to have grip, nor fifth attack. You have plenty of other advantages, even above and beyond SRD. If you don't like it, try playing a class that requires effort.

Alright. Tarven, I feel you have a few decent points in your post, but is there really a need to attack the other posters and be just down right belligerent in your posts? Your posts are so derogatory and mean spirited, that I have decided to block them so I do not have to subject myself to that kind of bad attitude.
I fear that any and all points, no matter how well thought out and possibly true they are, are going to be overlooked by your rudeness and complete disregard for the other players here.
Have a look at the quoted post above. How do you expect for anyone to mull over what you have said and actually consider it, when you are absolutely nothing but close minded and belittling?
Calm down...think before you type...this is a game after all.
**Edited because I cannot spell

Aldren wrote:

Tarven wrote:If you don't like it, try playing a class that requires effort.

I like being lazy. I am the laziest of the lazies.

Insinuating that playing a fighter takes no effort is a very large statement to make about a broad swath of our player base. I like to think that it's more than a lazy excuse to play a class.

Compared to any other class, fighters do not require any effort. GMing skills is comparatively a breeze, and they have a lot fewer skills, especially active skills, that require GMing. Everything that fighters need to GM, with the exception of disarm and bash, is automatic.

Back on topic, I would prefer making other additions over removing currently-coded benefits.

Okay, fine. Then give EVERY class an additional attack, and give wizards 2 (they should have second attack as it is), and also give every class grip.

Algon wrote: Alright. Tarven, I feel you have a few decent points in your post, but is there really a need to attack the other posters and be just down right belligerent in your posts? Your posts are so derogatory and mean spirited, that I have decided to block them so I do not have to subject myself to that kind of bad attitude.
I fear that any and all points, no matter how well thought out and possibly true they are, are going to be overlooked by your rudeness and complete disregard for the other players here.
Have a look at the quoted post above. How do you expect for anyone to mull over what you have said and actually consider it, when you are absolutely nothing but close minded and belittling?

Because I'm tired of repeating myself to the various fighters who keep saying the same thing as each other. Notice, that it seems to be ONLY fighters who object to these changes. I'm tired of having to state the same points, over and over, to people who haven't done the math.

And as I've said already in this post: Fighters are easy-mode. They start out strong, and don't peak until 50, and even then, their plateau is higher than most classes. They're the most 'forgiving' of errors, they have very high hit point potential, very high armor class potential, very high damage potential. Fighters think that they should be able to dominate every other class, all the while saying how other classes shouldn't be able to do this or that.

If you want to make personal attacks, Algon, and say I have a bad attitude, we can talk about poor OOC behaviors and meta-gaming. Please don't push me to go there. If I have a poor attitude towards players right now, it's because I've been subjected to cheating, meta-gaming, twinking, and bullying, and then treated as though I victimized others. Meanwhile, I'm working towards improving the game FOR ALL CLASSES, including fighters, with constructive ideas and solutions, and yet hearing the EXACT SAME arguments, over and over, from different people, who aren't reading the counter-arguments. I'm tired of hearing about how "Fifth attack hardly hits anyway", when that can ONLY be in regards to PvP. Against a mobile with 20 AC, which is reasonably high for mobiles, you should be hitting -no less- than 50% of the time.

I'm sick of players thinking only in terms of their PvP advantages or disadvantages. This isn't a PK Mud. It's an RP mud that -allows- PK.

Bregga wrote:As for the need of grip and fifth attack, have you tried playing a fighter? I'm sorry but years of training, and training, and training I do not agree with you. Fighters are not completely the EASIEST. You can't have a fighter level 50 with no skills trained up. You have to train them constantly to get to a point where they are even decent.

I -have- actually played a fighter. Have -you- played a wizard? Why do you think there are so many fighters and clerics out there, and so few thieves or wizards? Because they're easier. Wizards have potential to become quite powerful, even without abusing polymorph, but it requires a lot of planning, thought, and dedication. Clerics require some effort in leveling their spells, but comparatively little.

Bregga wrote:Luckily we do not have to convince you. I am pretty sure the imms, and staff make the decisions on this.

Then why are people making the same tired arguments, over and over and over, as if trying to convince me? Is it because they know deep down that I'm right, and are worried that staff will indeed agree with me? Really, I don't anticipate that happening. I think that they will agree with the "Add to others, not take away from fighters" stance, because that's typically been the case with all classes in the past. Even though they -have- taken away from casters, with the new systems. People seem to not pay attention to that. Casters used to be able to both attack, and cast. No longer. Casters used to be able to fairly well spam their spells. No longer. Why? Class balance. These were VERY necessary changes, but they WERE removals. Just as I feel that the removal of grip, and especially of fifth attack, are necessary.

I'm done. This thread has gone totally off-topic. I refuse to have to defend myself or my opinions, and then to be called rude for expressing a viewpoint that fighters are easy-mode.

Then why are people making the same tired arguments, over and over and over, as if trying to convince me? Is it because they know deep down that I'm right, and are worried that staff will indeed agree with me? Really, I don't anticipate that happening.

Do you really think yourself that high up in the game, and against the staff that we would have to convince you? I think you need to open your eyes and read a little bit more. I'm saying it's a good thing we don't do to the rude nature you take in your posts.

Bregga wrote:Luckily we do not have to convince you. I am pretty sure the imms, and staff make the decisions on this.


As for the need of grip and fifth attack, have you tried playing a fighter?

Also

Bregga wrote: I think you need to open your eyes and read a little bit more.

I find this to be just as rude as anything I've said. And believe me when I say I used the delete key to stop myself from saying some stuff that would easily top this. When people make comments like these, yes, I'm going to respond in kind.

But I still like how you don't answer the question.

Why are people making the same tired arguments, over and over and over, as if trying to convince me? I'm not telling anyone else "You're wrong in your viewpoints". I'm stating, "These are my viewpoints, and I haven't seen anything to convince me otherwise".

Okay then, let's bring this a little bit on-topic. From the perspective of a player who -has- played a wizard character, I also don't think removing one attack and grip from fighters is the way to go. At the same time, if the alternative is buffing every other class, then I would suggest giving disarm to everyone(Or at least all the melee classes)? After all, in SRD there's no restrictions as to which classes can disarm and which cannot. Infact, disarming while unarmed puts the weapon in -your- hands. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/specia ... htm#disarm)

On the matter of grip though, I can only see wanting it to stay as long as locked gauntlets aren't a feature. They aren't, so why remove the skill? It's not outdated just yet. If locked gauntlets -were- introduced to the MUD I am sure nobody, not even the most veteran fighter players, would be opposed to the removal of grip right? I've no idea how difficult it might be to add those, and I'm in no way asking for them, but that's just how I see it.

With all the changes to combat currently going on, it's understandable for people to be a little bit worried about the survivability of their class. And yes, PVP is a concern just like PVE is. It's one in the same, and the same argument that it's an RP mud could be used against PVE as has been used against PVP.

Everyone needs to cool off for a while. There's no need for all of the hostilities being splattered all over the forums, and this thread is a prime example of that. And that's in no way aimed at anyone in particular. We're all just here to enjoy the game.

-Althasizor

Hi guys! In all honesty... I don't think they're tired arguments. This is a discussion
forum. Where we discuss things. Say your peace. Say your pros and your cons. Leave it at that.
People are saying their opinion. They are entitled to their opinion (on the subject).
They write here to express what they think, not to argue back and forth and be taken
apart peice by peice to be proven wrong. If something is said, you don't need to
repeat yourself.

Including this one I'm writing, posts have been derailed to the point of where I don't
even want to read them anymore. I don't want to post MY opinion for sake of it being
rudely criticized and judged in a harsh way. It does not make me feel good. I come to the
game and forums to have fun. To enjoy myself. For the roleplay and the people.

Things shouldn't be exactly and solely only SRD. Yeah, it's neat to add things and align some rules,
but we're still Forgotten Kingdoms. That is what makes us different. We are our own game.

I have played every class, except for Paladin. I have put my time and effort into every
single one. Priest and Rogue are my favorite, though! I'll admit that I have been sticking
with those two, lately. However, I do not support taking anything away, unless it is absolutely
hurting the game.

Altha's post came up just as I was writing mine. I'd like to chime in with agreement. I believe we should keep grip, unless something like the mentioned locked gauntlets come along.

Go for it be as mean to me as you want. It would just prove to us all that we are right to call you out on your behavior that remains unchecked all over the forums and Keeps a lot of people from posting or reading important things. You derail topics with your rude comments. So come on don't be afraid.

Nearraba wrote: Altha's post came up just as I was writing mine. I'd like to chime in with agreement. I believe we should keep grip, unless something like the mentioned locked gauntlets come along.

I'm in agreement with this to a degree, I'd like the option for both grip or wearing the locked gauntlet, I don't know if every fighter would opt for it, so allowing them to keep the option for grip without the item, but when disabling the skill when they wear it, seems like a good idea to me. If its possible.

Fair, Alth. And thanks for cautioning cooler temperament without making it into an attack.

Locked Gauntlets would be pretty easy, I think. They would merely add +10 to your opposed roll when on the receiving end of being disarmed.

My only concern would be if there wasn't a sacrifice for using them (For example, requiring a full round action to switch weapons, or to draw/sheath a weapon into a locked gauntlet, even with quick draw).

I can see arguments both for and against giving all classes disarm. I will concede that. However, given that based on current code that you can't even -counter- disarm, unless you have the skill, I would say that it should be instituted for all. Even if priests and wizards are entirely unlikely to ever attempt it, being as they have better things to do, there should be that chance, however slim, that when attempting to disarm them, the initiator of the disarm has a chance to be disarmed as well (unless of course they have the improved disarm feat, as per the actual origin of this thread).

When this thread began, and even when this argument about grip and fifth attack began, it was about movement towards SRD. Alitar posited that due to the combat changes, adding +4 to the attempt to disarm, with the improved disarm feat, would be more in keeping, due to the changes in the combat system. I merely suggested that if that was the case, then the tradeoff should be removing grip. All people seem to be reacting to, however, is the "Don't change my character!" portion, while those same people point at other classes and say, "They shouldn't be able to do that! Take that away!"

The point with grip, though, Alth, is the mechanics. Grip doesn't even do what people seem to think it does. Nor does it require GMing to do be effective. What it does is increase the difficulty of the opposed roll. Which fighters already have the overall advantage in. If people would take these things into full consideration, before simply saying, "Rabble rabble, don't screw with us!" they might actually see the sensibility of it.

The addition of a +4 to the disarm roll is, in effect, improving the fighter class. And basically ONLY the fighter class. The other classes that have disarm generally won't have the plethora of feats that fighters have, in order to take the feat. Possibly, but not likely (okay, maybe paladins... I'm not sure what they typically spend their feats on). Especially given that the improved disarm feat has a prerequisite feat.

RE Bregga: I just realized who you are, and I'm not going to justify you by getting further drawn in to a public argument.

RE Nearabba: What makes them tired arguments, is that they're the -same- arguments as others have made.

Nearabba wrote:If something is said, you don't need to repeat yourself.

Evidently I do, because they're repeating themselves, or repeating what someone else has already said, and been refuted. I am just as entitled to stating my opinions, without being treated rudely or being taken apart, piece by piece, by multiple people, over and over, who are saying the same thing that someone else has already said.

Nearabba wrote:Things shouldn't be exactly and solely only SRD. Yeah, it's neat to add things and align some rules, but we're still Forgotten Kingdoms. That is what makes us different. We are our own game.

Then the +4 for the improved disarm feat doesn't need to be added either.

I find that responses coming from veteran players, many of whom have a Fighter (or multiple) as their primary character(s), seemly match to be quite interesting.. Perhaps, then, one of opposing view should try to determine if their perspective is corrupted by motive.

Anyone who has known me for a decent duration of time should be perceptive enough to see that I am not one to shy from my opinions on subjects I find of interest or importance to me. I quite enjoy a rational debate or argument, but I don't particularly care a great deal for irrational ones.

If one believes that everyone else is wrong and their opinion on a matter is correct, but have no factual basis for their arguments aside from their own "feelings" or intuition, I think it's time to retire from said debate as it will never get anywhere.

I don't believe the removal of grip is the answer. Maybe in the future, but not today. Probably not even in the near future. Likewise, fifth attack (even though it misses a lot; probably the full 95% of the time) being removed from the game is also no prize of a solution. I don't feel the need to go into detail as to why I should feel this way, but if you really want an answer I'm prepared to explain the emotional attachment and pride one puts into their character's accomplishments, including the progression of skills. Devaluing their characters devalues the MUD as a whole.

So, before suggesting the removal of skills that you feel people don't deserve, think about whether your opinion (self-righteous as it may be) is of such great value that the deprivation of others is a worthy price to pay for your interests granted.

Grip isn't hurting anyone. If Tarven truly believes what he says when he states "I'm sick of players thinking only in terms of their PvP advantages or disadvantages. This isn't a PK Mud. It's an RP mud that -allows- PK." then he will bow out of this altogether, as grip or fifth attack offer little imbalance in PVE setting.

Changes have recently been made to improved disarm, which should prevent counterattacks and adjust bonuses. Feedback welcome, but please be concise.

Raona wrote: Changes have recently been made to improved disarm, which should prevent counterattacks and adjust bonuses. Feedback welcome, but please be concise.

Might anyone happen to know if this feat works as it does in SRD? That is, it prevents counter-disarms and grants +4 to disarm attempts, in addition to the loss of the AoO mentioned in "help improved disarm." If anyone has the feat and has noticed an improvement in disarm attempts with it, etc. I'd be grateful to hear!

While I cannot state with any certainty of the improvement in the use of the skill, I have found the AoO elimination to have a significant effect on the skills usefulness. If there is an additional bonus, I would definitely not be complaining, but I think the feat has value with or without knowing for certainty if the bonus exists.

An additional question that comes to mind. Does anyone know what determines the counter disarm attempt.

Sometimes when an NPC or PC tries to disarm my fighter he will take the AOo attack just fine, and other times he will actually disarm them automatically and I could never really figure out why or when.

Hadwyn wrote: While I cannot state with any certainty of the improvement in the use of the skill, I have found the AoO elimination to have a significant effect on the skills usefulness. If there is an additional bonus, I would definitely not be complaining, but I think the feat has value with or without knowing for certainty if the bonus exists.

That's totally fair enough. In Raelikh's case, though, his AC and dodge/parry are so high that the AoO rarely even hits him, and he's only got a few feat points left, which will be spent on other more useful things if I find out this doesn't work. So for him it really is all about the +4 bonus and the loss of counter attempts.

Yemin wrote: An additional question that comes to mind. Does anyone know what determines the counter disarm attempt.

Sometimes when an NPC or PC tries to disarm my fighter he will take the AOo attack just fine, and other times he will actually disarm them automatically and I could never really figure out why or when.

I've often wondered the same thing.

I believe it functions like 2nd-5th attack skills and/or backstab/circle: the skill itself determines if it happens, the roll determines if it succeeds. This is just an educated guess, though. On my rogue I do not currently have disarm trained and have never seen an auto/counter disarm fire, leading me to believe it is skill-based. If you guys are targeting disarm for training, note if you see the frequency increase? Alternatively, some mobs may have Imp Disarm feat and others may not.

Edited to add: After training disarm, I have seen several counter-disarm attempts without having the feat and can confirm the above hypothesis.