A plea to un-nerf

AndrewCarr · Post by **AndrewCarr** » Sun May 23, 2004 3:08 am

do you realize how long it takes clerics to buff themselves, much less a friend? Sure, i'll sit for 5 mins and prepare for a fight while the enemy runs halfway across the server.

DrakhanValane · Post by **DrakhanValane** » Sun May 23, 2004 3:34 am

Yes I do. I have a level 16 cleric. Learn what buffs are important when. If you cast every buff you have and spend 5 minutes at it because of this I don't exactly call it efficient. I don't buff myself that much. I'd rather buff a fighter who is better at combat than my support cleric.

dond · Post by **dond** » Sun May 23, 2004 5:17 am

heh

i'd rather buff my char than a fighter who gets stunned because he'd rather spend his points on the initial 20 str than balance his stats so he can have decent svs :/

DrakhanValane · Post by **DrakhanValane** » Sun May 23, 2004 6:42 am

I'd rather give him clarity.

Agent Shiny · Post by **Agent Shiny** » Mon May 24, 2004 8:14 am

I'd rather say: stay here and lemme kill it instead. lol

BaconStrip · Post by **BaconStrip** » Thu May 27, 2004 3:06 pm

Well, acid sheath does 1d6+1 pt per 5 levels. At level 40, it does 1d6+8 dmg. If that is not a over-nerf for a 5th level spell, I don't know what is. I don't mind the lower spell durations because lower durations can always be extended via the feat, but this kind of dmg reduction (exactly 1/10th of what it used to do) is just a waste of script space. Just remove the spell or leave it alone.

dond · Post by **dond** » Thu May 27, 2004 6:30 pm

BaconStrip wrote:Well, acid sheath does 1d6+1 pt per 5 levels. At level 40, it does 1d6+8 dmg. If that is not a over-nerf for a 5th level spell, I don't know what is. I don't mind the lower spell durations because lower durations can always be extended via the feat, but this kind of dmg reduction (exactly 1/10th of what it used to do) is just a waste of script space. Just remove the spell or leave it alone.

the reason it was changed is because you can just stand there and get hit then heal...you could clear out quite a few bosses with that rather easily (i did it at 10 to the mobs in duergars)

i hope they'll change it to grant like 40 resist (not 'soak' like energy buffer) acid for it's duration.

ATI · Post by **ATI** » Fri May 28, 2004 6:43 pm

Fine.....thats intelligence...not a reason to nerf stuff....if monsters aren't constructed correctly thats the dev's fault and shouldn't be a reason to nerf. I have to say I'd enjoy unnerfing.

As I said, this is really easy...un nerf the spells..let them do their thing....use items, quests, gold, harder monsters, and such to supplement the problems..

If you're worried about Harm making things easy for chars...put a boss in there that is immune to harm....suddenly harm isn't so bad.

If you're worried about PvP, why not add items that are geared towards PvP, items that add SR and add to save bonuses help in PvP (nearly 100 percent of the time

).

nerfing spells seems like a short term solution. What happens when The dev's start adding SR items, and bonus to save items and spells simply stop working in PvP (or against monsters)? Do we still continue to nerf?

No. the invariable solution should be that increasing items and item spreads will balance things out. Nerfs don't make balance, they just make upset players. Sure for right now, nerfing harm seems like a good idea.... When epic levels get added, what are clerics going to do to kill a lvl 30 monster? Its to the point where spells that are directly designed for a specific goal, no longer function....like Harm. Harm...designed to bring a person to 1d4 HP's....now if you're lucky it does 60 dmg to a person. That not only destroys the point of harm, it destroys one of the most valuable spells for clerics.

Of course...we can keep nerfing and just see what happens.

Or we could wait a little bit longer, ask the devs to spend more time on construction, and have the following : More items, harder and more intelligent monsters, more quests, and more versatile forms of playing the game, as opposed to teh quick fix: nerfing.

Please...nerfing sounds good on paper, but it just hurts us in the long run.

dond · Post by **dond** » Fri May 28, 2004 6:50 pm

?
they're not 'nerfing'. they're 'fixing' bioware's implementation of the spells.
always funny you look at it so one sided. 'oh look, they nerfed igms! summons are soo nerfed! man, they ruined call lightning!'

give it a rest.
let them create their vision and get off their backs with the nerfing nonsense.

AndrewCarr · Post by **AndrewCarr** » Fri May 28, 2004 6:51 pm

It's our vision too, that's why we're in beta so we can provide feedback

dond · Post by **dond** » Fri May 28, 2004 7:04 pm

yes, but saying unnerf is not feedback. it's whining.

what is wrong with the spells you dont currently like?

spell it out, and give ideas. don't just say it sucks

i gave mine to acid sheath up above!
i dont think it should be returned to the original bio spell because the ai cant handle it.

Teh Panda · Post by **Teh Panda** » Fri May 28, 2004 8:56 pm

The Devs shouldn't concentrate on the nerf process right now, and put more effort into creating content.

People will always call Nerf! and there will be those that disagree. This is the eternal process that is a MMORPG, and having played several (5), I should know.

Nobody can ever agree as to what needs nerfing and what needs boosting. Players failing to realize a counter, call nerf. Those who don't wish to lose their advantage may cry against nerfing. In general it's hard to get an accurate picture of the matter and developers end up swinging the nerf bat back and forth trying to hit a solution, and they almost never do.

Have you ever heard of an online-game where there weren't issues of class balance? There are always dissenting opinions.

It is better to create a strong foundation for the game, before walking into the confusing maze that is 'balancing'.

AndrewCarr · Post by **AndrewCarr** » Fri May 28, 2004 10:33 pm

dond, we are giving ideas. Like resists to mage dmg types, not just physical, lightning, cold, fire, and you decided to say, "oh, that's stupid n00b, stfu."

ATI · Post by **ATI** » Sat May 29, 2004 2:11 am

Yo...DonD dont' put words in my mouth....I didn't call IGMS, or call lightning nerfed....I called Harm nerfed. So...please...next time, don't misquote me. Next of all..>Summons rock...the duration on the spell makes sense too. Im in favor of balanced spells and all...im not in favor of spells, Like harm, that no longer function the way the DnD universe designed the spell.

Now, DonD if you don't like it...you should stop posting here, because its about ideas..and unlike you, I actually posted a way to stop the detriment of spells...but then again you didn't read those...so maybe you should respond to my suggestions not my complaints.

Item spread could solve most if not all balance issues. Before nerfing the spells make items that seem to balance things, and THEN decide what spells should, shouldn't be nerfed. (and increasing a spell's power isn't a nerf....so go back to reading Funk and Wagnals)

Oh and I quote: they're not 'nerfing'. they're 'fixing' bioware's implementation of the spells.

Good argument, however saying they aren't nerfing but "fixing" doesn't constitute any functional difference in your word usage.

Thats like Enron, They didn't Steal money, they were "taking and using analytical projections for future cost gains" so DonD that whole...the Dev's are "fixing the game" argument is crap. The game wasn't broke to begin with, their adjusting it. And when things get adjusted in the negative i.e. Harm, thats a nerf. When somethig gets adjusted in the positive its a boost. SImple as that.

SO are you going to tell me why my suggestions for a change are bad? Or just explain to me the differences between "nerf" and "Fix"? Please provide criticism that people can use...

Post by **Lokey** » Sat May 29, 2004 2:52 am

If we put a sign in front of a store, it's a nerf to all the people that found it before, lol.

When it comes to nerfing, the creators are always in the wrong by definition, so they'll tend to ignore posts with the n-word prominent.

-----

The easiest way to do spells is by in-game description. Many spells have been altered to match descriptions better (since we don't hak, we're stuck with them). There's a tweak or two that'll take effect next build (Black Blade instant AoE instead of summon), but we need to take the time to outline the spell system more before we do further adjustments.

Like I said, we'll match the description better (too many of Bio's spells don't) and this will trim the magic bullet aspect in the spell lists a lot. 3.5 Harm, Heal, Haste are changes we chose. Many PnP spells are beefed/nerfed in NWN because of areas where NWN doesn't follow PnP (i.e. effectiveness of damage shields because of NWN soak/resist/immune or the plot summon for black blade).

Remember, it'll take time to design, then more time to code, then more time to get into a beta-testable form.