Good thing Merlin didnt live in EQ .. no more buffing
Gstg
39th level .. I assume this is due to vast twinking that goes on in EQ.
I have to ask y this has been done ..heheh
A lvl 50 monk was created in 2 days of play time using lvl 49th type buffing
spells. So if it's to stop twinking .. I think it would have to be done at a
much earlier stage such as your not allowed to help those not in your exp
lvl ...
It also takes some of the role play out as far as I concerned. For example
Im a lvl 60 Shaman (currently 51) traveling through Everfrost and want to
help my fellow barbarians ... well I can use my buffs from 10 lvls ago, but
cant use the magics that my skills have given to me .. due to some thought
that a lager buff might unbalance the game in some way ... heheh.
It's a good thing Merlin didnt live in EQ .. or King Arthur would still be a
stable hand .. with a big sword on the barn wall .. heheh.. 8-)
Lvl 49 spells can twink a noob .. just as well as lvl 60 spells .. as far as
unbalancing the game ... hehe.. Are you thinking .. that lvl 60 Spike
Shields form Druids (33 Damage) are so much more devastating then lvl 49
spike shields (24 Dam).
Personally I twink all the time because I enjoy powerleveling and I enjoy
playing classes after lvl 20. Prior to lvl 20 .. My Enc and my Warrior are
still both Tanking mobs alot ... not that much difference between the
classes. It's not until lvl 20 that the classes start to break apart and the
lil subtlties start to come out. This actually has lil effect on my twinking
chars to lvl 40 ... which is when the new spells would take over anyways,
but Alas the role play is effected .. 8-(
Being a lvl 60 Shaman among my people in everfrost and helping them to
tackle an Ice giant is more a roleplay issue then a twinking issue ... This
will have lil effect on twinking. Im sure some will disagree, but if you
think it will such a great effect ... hehe.. just watch in the near future
and see if twinking goes up or down .. or stays the same ... I assure you it
willl increase as servers mature and more people reach the higher (50 ish)
lvls .... it has lil to do with limiting effects .. the more you limit the
more the determined players will find a way to do what you didnt want them
to do ... what you will do is effect the players who didnt normally intend
to twink in the first place ..hehe. 8-)
Oh well .. just my 2 coppers .. 8-)
Dorian Brytestar
I'll see ya on later tonight, gotta go out with the wifey for a bit after work...
grrrr =) LOL!!!
--
Dorian Brytestar
Lvl 51 High Elf Vicar of Tunare
Povar
"Gstg" <gs...@home.com> wrote in message
news:c3%P4.184873$bm.8...@news1.alsv1.occa.home.com...
: Abashi stated that new spells 51+ level .. will not work on characters below
:
:
:
Flagration
Gstg
"Flagration" <Fuckoff> wrote in message
news:3910b...@news.cadvision.com...
bal...@my-deja.com
would have had no problem going back to his level 49- spells. The
higher level buffs just use so much magical power that a lesser
character would be killed by them. At least that is the best
explination I can think of.
In article <c3%P4.184873$bm.8...@news1.alsv1.occa.home.com>,
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Ken Andrews
>cant use the magics that my skills have given to me .. due to some thought
>that a lager buff might unbalance the game in some way ... heheh.
You have a Lager buff? My Ogre Shaman's never seen one. Where'd you pick
it up? Is it Barbarian only? Is there also a Bock buff? If there is,
what's the difference between the two?
(God, I love typos sometimes.)
Jesse Bellam
cannot be true. I don't think it's possible because there's a limit on the
amount of exp you get per kill. For ex. You can somehow kill an SG at lvl
1 (lets say party takes him down to 1hp then zones and warrior lvl 1 somehow
hits for 1hp) you don't automatically go up 10 lvls. A mob 10 lvls higher
then you will only give max exp of a light red for example solo. This is
why I don't see it being possible that there's a lvl 50 monk in 48 hours
playing time. YOUR saying he lvled more then 1 lvl per hour. Hell lvls and
all, not likely.
bizbee wrote in message ...
>Yn erthygl <39118...@news.cadvision.com>, sgrifenws "Ken Andrews"
><gobble@degook>:
>combines the lager with the better aspects of the less popular ale
>buff.
>At 51 you get IPA.
>
Dorian Brytestar
response. Buh bye PLONK!
--
Dorian Brytestar
Lvl 51 High Elf Vicar of Tunare
Povar
"Flagration" <Fuckoff> wrote in message news:3910b...@news.cadvision.com...
: Fuck off.
:
:
: "Gstg" <gs...@home.com> wrote in message
: news:c3%P4.184873$bm.8...@news1.alsv1.occa.home.com...
: > Abashi stated that new spells 51+ level .. will not work on characters
: below
: > 39th level .. I assume this is due to vast twinking that goes on in EQ.
: >
: > I have to ask y this has been done ..heheh
: >
: > A lvl 50 monk was created in 2 days of play time using lvl 49th type
: buffing
: > spells. So if it's to stop twinking .. I think it would have to be done at
: a
: > much earlier stage such as your not allowed to help those not in your exp
: > lvl ...
: >
: > It also takes some of the role play out as far as I concerned. For example
: > Im a lvl 60 Shaman (currently 51) traveling through Everfrost and want to
: > help my fellow barbarians ... well I can use my buffs from 10 lvls ago,
: but
: > cant use the magics that my skills have given to me .. due to some thought
: > that a lager buff might unbalance the game in some way ... heheh.
: >
: > It's a good thing Merlin didnt live in EQ .. or King Arthur would still be
: >
: >
:
:
:
Gstg
Excalibur the movie) .. caused him to sleep for a bit .. would seem like
that was his max skill ..heheh.. 8-)
<bal...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:8es02o$uff$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> Merlin was a wizard... no buffs. But, if he could buff, Im sure he
> would have had no problem going back to his level 49- spells. The
> higher level buffs just use so much magical power that a lesser
> character would be killed by them. At least that is the best
> explination I can think of.
>
>
>
> In article <c3%P4.184873$bm.8...@news1.alsv1.occa.home.com>,
> "Gstg" <gs...@home.com> wrote: