Could Envenom be put as an ability in Combat rather than Knighthood? Or in both, maybe? Because venoms don't carry into the arena, so for a Telekinetic, without venoms AnimateDagger is useless. Soooo... if Envenom was put in Combat, this would solve our problems because we'd be able to envenom in the arena.

Please?

Why not just put it into the AnimateDagger skill?

The problem here is not that you cannot do it, it is the fact that they don't go into the arena. Get a warrior to envenom (because we're good at it ) and fight with it then, hopefully they will fix the fact it strips venoms.

No, I don't want this because I consider it a trade skill.


Now selling, envenoming services

I remember having to get my arrows envenomed all the time by Arelas in Achaea. It was an utter pain in the ass, especially since I usually didn't use them and had to get a new batch when they decayed.

Based off of the "Pick your trade skills" poll, and just common sentiment, poisons is the most worthless tradeskill. I think it sounds like a fine idea to require a ....wait. Is envenom in Knighthood or Poisons? I was assuming it was in Poisons, but if it isn't maybe it should be. At least they'd have something to sell then. And they should just go into the arena and restore to whatever you had when you come out.

Anyway, that sort of changed my idea. It was thinking it made Poisonists better, not necessarily knights.

I always think Poisonists = Warriors because Gwylifar is the only Poisonist I know about.

Edit: I spelled Gwylifar correctly from memory. Yay me.

That would work.

Or, I'd be happy if they let venoms carry into the arena.

Hey, I smell an expansion in my market -- maybe I can make 1000 coins a year now! Muhahahahah! Soon, some of your gold will be mine! Well, just a little.

Anyway, I added "envenoming services" to my ad, but the demand so far has been... well, there wasn't any, so I don't know what it was.

Envenom high in Combat, yes. Low in Combat, no. Low in Poisons, yes. And while we're making a shopping list, I want a high Envenom in Poisons that does it better somehow, so I can sell a service of "better envenoming" even to warriors. Maybe as simple as "more efficient spreading so I get twice as many doses" or something, since "more likely to hit" is probably a pain to code and goes against Lusternia's warrior combat philosophy, and I can't think of any other ways it could be better.

Carry into the arena would be good, only you know people will then want it to not get worn off when they leave, and that's what makes it difficult, it's the whole arena "snapshot" problem so oft discussed.

Putting Envenom in Poisons makes sense, but it wouldn't help in this situation because mages can't take Poisons.

I was thinking it wasn't supposed to help the mages, more to help the poisonists. Since I'm a druid (and don't have psionics *glower*) I don't see a problem with having to buy a few daggers and get someone else to envenom them.

This is the the point of view of someone who doesn't have the skill though, so it's either more objective, or more biased; I'm not sure which.

It makes more sense to put envenom in Knighthood or Combat than in Poisons. Brewing venoms is a 'scientific' process, much like alchemy. It's raher an academic skill. Warriors on the other hand, don't have to know how to make the venom but they surely train to use it on weapons.
So I think that current design where envenom is a skill of Knighthood is logical. It would also make sense if it was in Combat, but not Poisons.

If Poisons is such a crappy tradeskill, think of something else to make it more attractive, something that makes more sense... And really, I doubt that putting envenom in it would help much when it comes to profits. And if you do, what about Knights that don't pick Poisons? It would have to stay in Knighthood as well, the same skill in two different skillsets.

i know, have daggers with a little resevoir of venom in them that can only be filled by poisonists, so the dagger has a good 100 applications of venom in it.

I had thoughts about this, and actually wanted to do a trade off, Knights will get Shieldstun moved to Knighthood, and Envenom would be added to replace it in Combat. Unless there is some heavy objections, I'm going to include that on the next envoy report unless it is changed before then.

Or let poisonists put extra applications of venom on regular weapons. Or let them have a better chance of the venoms coming off. That would appeal to lots of people.

Shieldstun can be useful for everyone, envenom only for mages now (I mean except Warriors). I want to have shieldstun, not envenom, dammit.

*HEAVY OBJECTIONS*

Shieldstun is ridiculous. Having it as knights only solves nothing. The argument I've heard that it is okay because it cuts a knight's offence in half is a load of crap. My offence is a whole lot more than half active. A Nihilist's offence is a whole lot less than half demon and I guess contagion. I fear Murphy pounding me with one flail and shieldstunning while I have no way to cure a lot more than I fear Eiru's demon repeatedly shackling me or whatever while he can't do anything whatsoever. Shieldstun needs to like, be nerfed to 2 second stun MAXIMUM, or something. Less for higher size races. Almost permanent stun (I'm not sure if it is size based or not, but I know I was getting about 0.1 - 0.3 second windows with a Master Viscanti mashing shieldstun on me, at size 7 (TF, I diminished, he enlarged)) is beyond lame. On the defensive too.

Shieldstun shouldn't be available to everyone, its horribly crazy when used with ents or demesnes

It's horribly crazy when used...

Yeah.

With weapons too. Ugh. I actually didn't feel like ranting about this since I figured it was a problem everyone was aware of but if there's a suggestion to move it into knighthood so nonwarrior classes don't get it it shows a COMPLETE failure to recognise the problem as it is.

I disagree shiri.

Shieldstun for knights sacrifices the majority of our offence, cuts in in half really, not to mention you can't shieldstun unless BOTH arms are on balance, and shield balance is rather on the long side.

Using shieldstun with ents like a demon on wrath, or fused runes, phantoms and demesne effects is way worse.

Personally, I rely on shieldstun for sacrifices (which is just a lost cause) and I rely on it for the last couple of seconds before burstorgans kills them, if they are stupid enough to not cure it.

I don't really use it much, and neither do the other warriors. Shieldwhoring + rebounding stops the offence part, only in the hands of aslarans is shieldstun truly scary.

Sacrificing the majority is NOT sacrificing half. No way. Half of a knight's offence is not a bad thing at all WHEN the victim can't cure/react. No, a demon on wrath is not worse than half a knight's offence. It can't freaking kill me. If a knight shieldstuns all they have to do is keep attacking with their other arm and they're scot free. Hell, and you can have contagion/darkmoon/ancestralcurse/heretic/infidel going off at the same damn time too. (Probably not infidel though, you're s'posed to run away at that point.) And you'd be surprised as to who uses it, -especially- in team combat. Stun is the second worst affliction I can think of, and I'm not even sure if it's not worse than blackout. For someone to have someone else permanently (or nearly) disabled AND have half their offence left is insane.