Speed, Power, Health, and Endurance - These should not be interruptible.

I've looked through this forum and didn't see this suggestion, so I wanted to bring it up:

From Live Patch 1.90 (Sept 5, 2007) -
"Speed, Power, Health, and Endurance songs that require an instrument on Bards and Minstrels are no longer interruptible. "

With only one song being playable at at time, and having to swap from Speed to Endurance mid-fight as a Bard, these songs should not be interruptible. There is good reason this change was made on live, as no other realm deals with this frustration due to their form of the Endurance buffs.

Tue 22 Jan 2019 11:42 AM by Sepplord

Psylence wrote: ↑
Fri 18 Jan 2019 9:52 PM
I've looked through this forum and didn't see this suggestion, so I wanted to bring it up:

From Live Patch 1.90 (Sept 5, 2007) -
"Speed, Power, Health, and Endurance songs that require an instrument on Bards and Minstrels are no longer interruptible. "

With only one song being playable at at time, and having to swap from Speed to Endurance mid-fight as a Bard, these songs should not be interruptible. There is good reason this change was made on live, as no other realm deals with this QOL frustration due to their form of the Endurance buffs.

What about this is QOL?

It is a HUGE balance change, and hibs (and especially bards in particular) are nowhere near the need of any buffs imo

Tue 22 Jan 2019 3:06 PM by Bradekes

Sepplord wrote: ↑
Tue 22 Jan 2019 11:42 AM
What about this is QOL?

It is a HUGE balance change, and hibs (and especially bards in particular) are nowhere near the need of any buffs imo

While I also agree this isn't a QoL suggestion, I don't think it's a "HUGE" balance change. I don't think it's a necessary change either. It has to be understood that bard is the only class with endo & speed. Meaning if the bard was able to use endo song to out run as soon as combat ended they could switch to speed which isn't fair in small man. But 8 man's it would be balanced.

Tue 22 Jan 2019 9:57 PM by Psylence

Borderline overpowering buffs were made to Paladins to offset the easy access to Endurance. With endurance potions, long wind, and tireless being so easily accessible, keeping equal endurance with a bard in a small man is not challenge. Additionally, Bards individually don't benefit from Speed and Endurance songs... they can't use either if they choose to enter combat. I don't think allowing a class that has access to Endurance to actually use the Endurance qualifies as a huge balance change. It's QOL based on the logic that it doesn't add any utility to the character, it simply allows the character to use the utility it has.

Giving Paladins 2.5x Spec points and putting them up two levels on WS tables (19 -- > 21) is a huge balance change.
Allowing Bards to put their Endurance song up is a QOL change.

Tue 22 Jan 2019 10:09 PM by Bradekes

Paladin are not bard. Sword n board classes have a hard time being OP seeings their damage is so low even w/50 weaponskill. This is still a balance suggestion no matter how you twist your reasoning. When paladin get CC the comparison will make sense but you're comparing apples and oranges my friend. I am a fellow Hibster so I have no agenda.

GM already stated their QoL for instrument users stops at Harps being provided.

Tue 22 Jan 2019 10:12 PM by Psylence

First, we're talking about access to a fundamental group utility like Endurance (not the individual performance of a each class in a fight). So comparing Paladin, Shaman, and Bard make sense... since if a Paladin is in a group, that group expects to have Endurance... if a Shaman is in a group, that group expects to have Endurance... if a Bard is in a group, that group should expect to have Endurance.

Additionally, the fact that the Bard has to fill the role of main CC in the realm is even MORE of a reason why it should have this change, because it has to spend the initial few moments of the fight battling out CC against a realm with Bolt Range Mez or a Realm with Insta mez + insta stun. Unlike Paladins and Shaman who would have the free time to put up endurance in the initial moments of a battle without being interrupted (if they had to deal with the same dumb mechanic).

Bradekes wrote: ↑
Tue 22 Jan 2019 10:09 PM
GM already stated their QoL for instrument users stops at Harps being provided.

Actually, the GM stated their QoL addition of harps was to offset not allowing two songs to run at once; I've seen nothing with regards to allowing Bards to actually play Endurance song uninterrupted, as the Bard still has to endure a long static cast time mid-fight to apply the utility.

Tue 22 Jan 2019 10:22 PM by Bradekes

Psylence wrote: ↑
Tue 22 Jan 2019 10:12 PM
Actually, the GM stated their QoL addition of harps was to offset not allowing two songs to run at once.

That is not what they said. They said their QoL for instruments was harps, not to offset not allowing two songs(which again is not QoL but class balance). This is also not QoL. QoL is Quality of Life, meaning ergonomics not changing mechanics of abilities. Bards are fine the way they are as far as balance. Would this be nice in PVE vs monsters? yes, that is QoL not RvR so if you wanna suggest this as QoL, state that you want bard songs not to be interrupted by Mobs, as long as it is not enemy players pet.

Tue 22 Jan 2019 10:25 PM by Psylence

Bradekes wrote: ↑
Tue 22 Jan 2019 10:22 PM
Psylence wrote: ↑
Tue 22 Jan 2019 10:12 PM
Actually, the GM stated their QoL addition of harps was to offset not allowing two songs to run at once.

That is not what they said. They said their QoL for instruments was harps, not to offset not allowing two songs(which again is not QoL but class balance). This is also not QoL. QoL is Quality of Life, meaning ergonomics not changing mechanics of abilities. Bards are fine the way they are as far as balance. Would this be nice in PVE vs monsters? yes, that is QoL not RvR so if you wanna suggest this as QoL, state that you want bard songs not to be interrupted by Mobs, as long as it is not enemy players pet.

Perfect!

Then by your logic, because this is no longer a QOL request, the GMs explanation for Harps as a QOL change doesn't even apply to this discussion anymore.

Tue 22 Jan 2019 10:29 PM by Bradekes

Psylence wrote: ↑
Tue 22 Jan 2019 10:25 PM
Perfect!

Then by your logic, because this is no longer a QOL request, the GMs explanation for Harps as a QOL change doesn't even apply to this discussion anymore.

I would say the GM's input kinda finalized their opinion on the state of instrument balance.

As far as balance you have to consider that shaman endo has very small range to it, and Paladin endo comes at the cost of high power usage. Bard has no restrictions like this so their restriction comes from interrupts. Each realm is meant to be different, this is how DAoC is balanced to make the same abilities "different".

Tue 22 Jan 2019 10:45 PM by Psylence

Bradekes wrote: ↑
Tue 22 Jan 2019 10:29 PM
I would say the GM's input kinda finalized their opinion on the state of instrument balance.

As far as balance you have to consider that shaman endo has very small range to it, and Paladin endo comes at the cost of high power usage. Bard has no restrictions like this so their restriction comes from interrupts. Each realm is meant to be different, this is how DAoC is balanced to make the same abilities "different".

Just because something exists in a current state, doesn't mean it's not subject to change. That's why forums like this exist, to bring up suggestions.

The Bard faces a lot of other restrictions besides being interrupted... It's the least armored of the three classes, the most readily available target at the start of engagements due to leading for primary CC, and is required to sit through a long static cast time animation mid-fight to apply... having endurance be a potentially negated utility goes well-beyond the realm of a restriction.

Wed 23 Jan 2019 7:12 AM by Sepplord

then *gasp* grp two bards if your main bard is unable to provide endurance

plenty bards manage, and any albgrp would rather grp a bard for endu, than a paladin, despite the heavy buffs to paladins, so i don't think having to group two bards is such a burden

Bards are one of most OP classes that exists on phoenix and there are still request to buff them. And then you even try to mask your Buff request as a QOL change, that's just cheeky

Wed 23 Jan 2019 7:46 AM by rubaduck

I'll tell you how bad this will turn out, because the ramification is enormous to balance changes.

Minstrel: Lol, you kidding me? This is the single most played character. It is the best solo class, functions in small man and group, as well as stealth zergs. Removing the chance to interrupt them will just give them absolutely no counter play.

Mid: Just kidding

Hib: Bards will not be affected, endu song is never played because of tireless + LW1 + pots. But I agree, giving them this chance to be uninterruptible will be a big pro regardless.

This is not a QoL, because two classes will benefit from it. The one that will heavily will benefit from it is a class that is already top predator.

Wed 23 Jan 2019 7:47 AM by rubaduck

Sepplord wrote: ↑
Wed 23 Jan 2019 7:12 AM
then *gasp* grp two bards if your main bard is unable to provide endurance

plenty bards manage, and any albgrp would rather grp a bard for endu, than a paladin, despite the heavy buffs to paladins, so i don't think having to group two bards is such a burden

Bards are one of most OP classes that exists on phoenix and there are still request to buff them. And then you even try to mask your Buff request as a QOL change, that's just cheeky

No one is running endo. Two bards is viable in a Nat5 group, utter sheit in a caster group.