Mudder Posted June 22, 2015 Report Share Posted June 22, 2015 I'm almost positive they have always been 0. ...Unless I'm just crazy. I find it strange that Giants have the lowest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Naruthiron Posted June 23, 2015 Report Share Posted June 23, 2015 Humans got changed to 100 around the same time, if not exactly when, bards became 0exp as opposed to warriors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Celerity Posted June 23, 2015 Report Share Posted June 23, 2015 The relevant threads are here (original) and here (adopted idea) that explain why. Change log: 03/11/10 *Psionicist bug fixed.03/11/10 Ninja titles have been updated.03/11/10 Race/Class EXP penalties have been rearranged.03/11/10 *Immortal bug fixed.03/11/10 Execution now strips ALL affects, including learned study, on death.03/11/10 *Psionicist skill tweaked.03/11/10 Minotaurs can once again dual wield two-handed axes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudder Posted June 23, 2015 Author Report Share Posted June 23, 2015 Celerity. Thank you for the links... You are insanely helpful. Now, what was the reasoning behind making humans higher exp penalty than giants? ...I didn't see anyone address that. Have humans magically become stronger? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Celerity Posted June 23, 2015 Report Share Posted June 23, 2015 The difference is small and humans aren't better than fire giants (which are somewhat higher on the list). The basic premise is that I thought human combinations were more 'useful' than storm/giant combinations, especially considering them as qrace applicants. I still think that storm giants are generally terrible, and stone giants, while better than storm, aren't a top choice for any class they can be, so they are both considered poor choices, thus having a low exp pen. It is unfortunate that a human warrior has a higher exp pen than a storm warrior. The only way it could be avoided is for each individual (human warrior to be rated differently than human (race) + warrior (class))---which would have meant spelling out every combo's exp pen. It was an approximation, and while not perfect, is certainly much, much better than what we had before. Except now bards should probably swing completely to the high exp range it seems. Berserkers have become much more viable since that list was made as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudder Posted June 23, 2015 Author Report Share Posted June 23, 2015 Well, that makes a lot of sense. You still don't really see humans being any class other than qrace/qclass applicants. Every time I see a human I think "I wonder what he's going for?" Though the logic is sane and makes complete sense. Though I disagree about stone giants. I love them. I'd wager... Bards should be moved somewhere near Battlemage and Necromancer. 300 - 375 range.Berserkers should be around Monk and Paladin. 100 - 200. Thieves really should be much, much higher. Closer to ranger. Maybe just insert those in and shift the values accordingly (keeping the values the same but trade places) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Naruthiron Posted June 23, 2015 Report Share Posted June 23, 2015 Bards were 0 pen in their previous form. After further observation on their strength as a class, I am sure that we'll update the penalty as needed.I can only hypothesize that humans received the 100 penalty because they had far too easy of a time in their range. Given that humans tend to only be around for q-stuff, it makes sense that they should have a more uphill struggle than they had before.I'm not sure what your reasoning is for the rest. Could you elaborate? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudder Posted June 23, 2015 Author Report Share Posted June 23, 2015 I'm not sure what your reasoning is for the rest. Could you elaborate?Berserkers and Thieves? Thieves are an incredibly powerful class. I would not lump them with bards, which were at the time of that adjustment almost completely unviable in PK. (I know, I tried.)I think thieves are on par if not often more powerful than rangers, for both PK and survivability. Berserkers have been buffed since this list and I believe they may actually be a viable class now. (They were pretty weak before) Thus a little bit more penalty is warranted. Assuming we're following the original logic that Celerity laid out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Implementor Anume Posted June 23, 2015 Implementor Report Share Posted June 23, 2015 Human serks also get some (racial class specific) bonusses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mya Posted June 23, 2015 Report Share Posted June 23, 2015 I still think that storm giants are generally terrible, and stone giants, while better than storm, aren't a top choice for any class they can be, so they are both considered poor choices, thus having a low exp pen. I think that Stone are a top race. If only they could be evil, why would beat Ogres at most meele choices. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L-A Posted June 28, 2015 Report Share Posted June 28, 2015 Did human's still retain their 'affinity with magic' perk? L-A Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Celerity Posted June 28, 2015 Report Share Posted June 28, 2015 Yep. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mya Posted June 30, 2015 Report Share Posted June 30, 2015 And what is this "magic affinity" thing that everyone always said but never explained?#185-1 HUMAN HUMANS MAN~HUMAN HUMANS MANHumans are the most common race in the world, and make up the majorityof adventurers. Although they have no special talents like the otherraces, they are more versitile, being skilled in all of the classes.Humans have very average attributes are able to gain more benefitsfrom magical devices. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Implementor Anume Posted June 30, 2015 Implementor Report Share Posted June 30, 2015 Mya: e.g. if you have a group and use a glimmering staff, the sanc will wear off first on npc pets, then on the other players and then on the human who's grouped with the rest. So one hour more sanc in this example. Goes for other things as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
English lad Posted October 14, 2015 Report Share Posted October 14, 2015 While Anume pretty much covered it.. the human 'magic' bonus is a bonus to the duration on all consumables if i remember correctly. It doesn't affect the spell casting leveling - just the duration. Just for the sake of clarity - and to write something rather than just keep lurking for weeks on end like usual Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.