I propose that Vampirism should have a high upkeep cost and should be reworked in its entirety.

Betsararie

Vampirism requires far too much effort as it is to maintain, so I am firmly against this.

I am in support of some type of toggle to hide the ugly vampire visual effects, though.

Jarryzzt

I feel I have been misjudged by the forum members and have also been turned into a meme. This has devalued anything I say when in fact I actually have good ideas.

And that, right there, is how one loses an argument. Any argument, not just online.

---

In order to propose a change to something and not have it be an exercise in blowing smoke, one must first show that this "something" actually needs to change. All the OP has for that is: "I believe Vampirism is rampant in ESO" (which is a belief, not a fact, since not one of us has access to player data and breakdown, and since the OP hasn't even bothered to conduct any statistical studies like sitting at hubs and counting vamp/non-vamp characters); and "This is very strange, lore evading, lore breaking" - the fact that "vampirism is rampant" - which is essentially personal opinion.

Lest I pop anyone's bubble, IT development projects such as this MMO are generally not changed around and rearranged just because someone has an opinion (unless that someone happens to be a high-ranking manager of the company producing said MMO, but one can safely presume this does not apply here). Not the least because of the investment of time and resources required to change anything in a massive codebase such as this (likely with multiple concurrent builds in the works by multiple groups each working on this or that feature).

The irony is all the OP had to do is frame their proposal as - "here is an alternative, would you prefer that or the current system". Or something along those lines. To which I would say - well, some surely would, whereas I personally probably would not as I am of a general belief that it is better, from a design perspective, to reward players for actions taken than punish players for actions not taken.

Moreover, if I were to change Vamprism in principle I wouldn't fanny about with the whole feed-no-feed-passive-no-passive thing and rework it from the standpoint of a person being infected with a disease and having a couple of ways of dealing with it (embrace it fully or try to fight it, with reward-penalty balances down each path). This would require completely changing over the current actives/passives, however, and again, I have no tangible reason to suggest ZOS should objectively do any such thing. Nor, so far as I can tell, does anyone else in this thread.

Aesthier

I wholeheartedly disagree.

There are enough things changing in ESO at the moment no reason to waste resources on something so trivial when there are other things they need to keep their focus on.

VaranisArano

Jarryzzt wrote: »

I feel I have been misjudged by the forum members and have also been turned into a meme. This has devalued anything I say when in fact I actually have good ideas.

And that, right there, is how one loses an argument. Any argument, not just online.

---

In order to propose a change to something and not have it be an exercise in blowing smoke, one must first show that this "something" actually needs to change. All the OP has for that is: "I believe Vampirism is rampant in ESO" (which is a belief, not a fact, since not one of us has access to player data and breakdown, and since the OP hasn't even bothered to conduct any statistical studies like sitting at hubs and counting vamp/non-vamp characters); and "This is very strange, lore evading, lore breaking" - the fact that "vampirism is rampant" - which is essentially personal opinion.

Lest I pop anyone's bubble, IT development projects such as this MMO are generally not changed around and rearranged just because someone has an opinion (unless that someone happens to be a high-ranking manager of the company producing said MMO, but one can safely presume this does not apply here). Not the least because of the investment of time and resources required to change anything in a massive codebase such as this (likely with multiple concurrent builds in the works by multiple groups each working on this or that feature).

The irony is all the OP had to do is frame their proposal as - "here is an alternative, would you prefer that or the current system". Or something along those lines. To which I would say - well, some surely would, whereas I personally probably would not as I am of a general belief that it is better, from a design perspective, to reward players for actions taken than punish players for actions not taken.

Moreover, if I were to change Vamprism in principle I wouldn't fanny about with the whole feed-no-feed-passive-no-passive thing and rework it from the standpoint of a person being infected with a disease and having a couple of ways of dealing with it (embrace it fully or try to fight it, with reward-penalty balances down each path). This would require completely changing over the current actives/passives, however, and again, I have no tangible reason to suggest ZOS should objectively do any such thing. Nor, so far as I can tell, does anyone else in this thread.

And I'd have the same reaction to that suggestion as I did to the OP's. Hmm, that doesn't match up with established TES lore and gameplay on vampires.

Sounds like a cool idea, honestly. I'd totally play that in a different game.

Garamant

I am all for it. Would be cool to have an addition to one of the fighters guild abilities (thinking about you, Expert Hunter), once you activate it, to have your next heavy attack deal...% more damage to undead/daedra/ww. Or alternatively, give players the ability to create poisons that harms undead and daedra more and vampire players the option to create potions, that protect them from such effects.
A BG mode with Fighters Guild vs Vampire s would be fun too. Or Silver Hand vs WW.

Knowledge

Blanco wrote: »

Vampirism requires far too much effort as it is to maintain, so I am firmly against this.

I am in support of some type of toggle to hide the ugly vampire visual effects, though.

How does it require too much effort? It's so easy.

Knowledge

Jarryzzt wrote: »

I feel I have been misjudged by the forum members and have also been turned into a meme. This has devalued anything I say when in fact I actually have good ideas.

And that, right there, is how one loses an argument. Any argument, not just online.

---

In order to propose a change to something and not have it be an exercise in blowing smoke, one must first show that this "something" actually needs to change. All the OP has for that is: "I believe Vampirism is rampant in ESO" (which is a belief, not a fact, since not one of us has access to player data and breakdown, and since the OP hasn't even bothered to conduct any statistical studies like sitting at hubs and counting vamp/non-vamp characters); and "This is very strange, lore evading, lore breaking" - the fact that "vampirism is rampant" - which is essentially personal opinion.

Lest I pop anyone's bubble, IT development projects such as this MMO are generally not changed around and rearranged just because someone has an opinion (unless that someone happens to be a high-ranking manager of the company producing said MMO, but one can safely presume this does not apply here). Not the least because of the investment of time and resources required to change anything in a massive codebase such as this (likely with multiple concurrent builds in the works by multiple groups each working on this or that feature).

The irony is all the OP had to do is frame their proposal as - "here is an alternative, would you prefer that or the current system". Or something along those lines. To which I would say - well, some surely would, whereas I personally probably would not as I am of a general belief that it is better, from a design perspective, to reward players for actions taken than punish players for actions not taken.

Moreover, if I were to change Vamprism in principle I wouldn't fanny about with the whole feed-no-feed-passive-no-passive thing and rework it from the standpoint of a person being infected with a disease and having a couple of ways of dealing with it (embrace it fully or try to fight it, with reward-penalty balances down each path). This would require completely changing over the current actives/passives, however, and again, I have no tangible reason to suggest ZOS should objectively do any such thing. Nor, so far as I can tell, does anyone else in this thread.

If you read through the thread many others have posted similar proposed changes.

ADarklore

I keep my vamp at stage 2, unless I'm doing stealth quests... I cannot stand how ugly my character becomes at stage 4.

As far as lore, I'm no expert, but considering how far ESO takes place in the past, is it possible that some of the 'lore' that people are speaking of don't actually apply to ESO or were not known when ESO takes place?!?

starkerealm

Ackwalan wrote: »

starkerealm wrote: »

Ackwalan wrote: »

starkerealm wrote: »

Ackwalan wrote: »

Vampirism is in need of a change. When WW had an 8% stam regen even with no WW skills slotted, it was changed because to many people used it. Staying in stage 5 vamp and thus full benefits has no work involved. The +'s to stage 5 far out way the -'S, time to mix things up and put a little balance to it.

15%, not 8. You got the 15% recovery buff at all times.

You remember how vampires worked back then?

Your passives were always on. So you got your 10% magicka and stamina recovery buffs, your increased mitigation at low health, and your full movement in stealth even at Stage 1.

When Werewolves were changed, vampires got the exact same change. They needed to slot a vampire ability to retain those buffs.

Vampires were changed again with the Dark Brotherhood release, that's the current iteration of them.

It was 15% in WW form and 8% out of WW form. And the vamp buffs were always active no matter what was slotted.

It was 15%.

At launch, vampire buffs were always active, regardless of stage or if anything was slotted.

When werewolves were changed to require the ultimate to be slotted (I think this was with 1.6), vampires got an identical change. That requirement was later removed when vampires were overhauled with the Dark Brotherhood release.

While in WW form.

No. +40% Poison Damage while in Werewolf Form. The +15% Stam recovery was permanently on. Actually, the poison vulnerability also applied in human form at launch, as I recall, but that may have been a bug.

Also, the WW stam recovery was, basically, undocumented at launch. The tooltip wasn't updated until... 1.5, I think.

starkerealm

Knowledge wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

Knowledge wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

We do see a comatose vampire in the games, when Count Hassildor's wife refuses to drink blood. And we also see feral vampires in Castle Volkihar in Skyrim, presumably because they haven't fed.

The closest thing we players get to that situation was the hella creepy vampire dreams in Oblivion. Those were pretty great.

"You dream of walking through the cool night air. Your body cries for blood, having not fed for days. Weakly, you stumble to a small pool. As you bend down to it, you see that it is not water in the pool, but warm, fresh blood, steam rising off of it. You lower your head to drink, but cannot open your mouth. As you realize in horror that your lips have been sewn shut, a pair of cold, white hands reach out from the pool and draw you under."

Okay, so if a player doesn't feed after X time they should go into a coma then?

I don't recall if there's a time period mentioned in that quest for how long it took her to go into that coma. Maybe like a 3-day (online) period to mimic dying of thirst?

Edited: like I said upthread, I dont really have the in-game experience with playing a vampire to know how this suggestion would actually play out practically. Maybe some players with that experience could weigh in? How rare would it be for you to spend 72 in game hours in stage 4?

Most players sit at stage 4 unless they are going into a specific dungeon like City of Ash. If it's a tank they are in stage 4 100% of the time usually. In PVP they are also in stage 4.

No... or, at least, they shouldn't. Most players will get the most benefit from Stage 3. Stage 4 is only useful if your character needs the stealth speed passive. Now, that doesn't mean that a lot of players aren't lazy, and just live at stage 4 regardless.

Betsararie

Stage 3 is the "sweet spot" for a lot of toons in PVP but the excessive maintenance required for vampirism makes it so that many simply compromise for stage 4, meaning they are overly vulnerable particularly to mag DKs which severely hurts balance.

That is why I am not in favor of adding any additional work to vampirism. I would actually be more in favor of something where we remove stage 4 completely, leaving stage 3 as the highest level. Keeping yourself at stage 4 will make you far too vulnerable to mag dks in particular which simply does not sit right with me.

Constantly feeding or remembering to drink that consumable that decreases your stage (can't even remember the name because I've never seeked one out), is far too much work and hurts the quality of player experience.

Sheezabeast

I wish we could have more gnarly ugly looking vampires, I know that's not a popular opinion, but I would feel more connected to my character with vampirism if there were more down-sides. It would increase the level of depth beyond just a regen buffer.

Leandor

Knowledge wrote: »

Minyassa wrote: »

I'm not familiar with that change, had to have been before I started playing and have not heard anyone discussing it. They really made a very large change to game mechanics solely for the sake of lore?

With the launch of Morrowind resource sustain and how it worked changed dramatically.

But for very different reasons. The developers and quite a few players were concerned that the resource regeneration in combination with the cost reduction mechanics removed a constraint from the game that was required since soft caps were removed: limiting min-maxing by making players choose between raw power and sustainability.

Even with that removal, damage values achievable have exploded. Without the regeneration nerf, we would today play a game that has no pvp anymore and pve would have us fight bosses with billions of hp just to withstand the onslaught.

This has nothing to do with "lore-based nerf that makes players unhappy". Stop using half truths as arguments. Your posts usually border baiting anyways.

Ectheliontnacil

No, just no.

Ragged_Claw

I've been a vampire on my main since early access and it is far from easy to maintain, that health regen is a killer (literally) try getting half-way through a trial and realising that you've forgotten your bloody Double Bloody Mara - and back in the day we didn't even have that. As it stands few (if any) of the skills are of any use and it's my experience that fewer players are bothering with it, unless for RP purposes. If anything I feel that both vamp and WW need some love, not punishment. As far as lore goes, what works in a single player game is not necessarily going to work in an MMO (there are at least a milliion threads on how the lore has changed in ESO). Also vampires spread vamprism, no? Why is it unbelievable that there would be so many vampires running around? Did you not read Dracula or Salem's Lot?? Joiiiin ussssss...

Stewart1874

@Knowledge

Kind of had you down as a troll but I do think you're onto something. I think there needs to be more of the extremes with the opportunity cost and generally speaking a bit more 'love' given to vampires.

Having a vampire build that includes zero vampire skills except passives is a bit depressing but in my current build there is no need in it. I'm not saying there should be ridiculous maintenance but certainly I do agree ZOS need to take a bit time to overhaul the current class and possibly look at adding more meaningful skills with a bigger trade off.

Perhaps having a maintenance cost - like having to feed or guards *** come for you at stage 4! would be a start to weeding out as you put it the 'lazy' players.

Other more varied abilites would be a nice inclusion to mix up builds a bit. I really think a new DLC vampirecentric zone would be an excellent opportunity to implement

Last thing I'd argue for is changing the feeding system, if it becomes a system where maintenance is required, prompts on stage changes would obviously be needed but also changing the feeding system to be a bit more like a DB assassination or pickpocket (rather than whatever the *** the current animation is) minus the death of the NPC. If action is witnessed like a murder a bounty should be accrued otherwise NPC could make some comment about being confused/ dizzy.

Anyway, its a valid discussion worth having and might help with the overall evolution of the game.

Gilvoth

Ectheliontnacil wrote: »

No, just no.

this ^
and i will add that i hope nothing changes about vampirism.

Knowledge

Stewart1874 wrote: »

@Knowledge

Kind of had you down as a troll but I do think you're onto something. I think there needs to be more of the extremes with the opportunity cost and generally speaking a bit more 'love' given to vampires.

Having a vampire build that includes zero vampire skills except passives is a bit depressing but in my current build there is no need in it. I'm not saying there should be ridiculous maintenance but certainly I do agree ZOS need to take a bit time to overhaul the current class and possibly look at adding more meaningful skills with a bigger trade off.

Perhaps having a maintenance cost - like having to feed or guards *** come for you at stage 4! would be a start to weeding out as you put it the 'lazy' players.

Other more varied abilites would be a nice inclusion to mix up builds a bit. I really think a new DLC vampirecentric zone would be an excellent opportunity to implement

Last thing I'd argue for is changing the feeding system, if it becomes a system where maintenance is required, prompts on stage changes would obviously be needed but also changing the feeding system to be a bit more like a DB assassination or pickpocket (rather than whatever the *** the current animation is) minus the death of the NPC. If action is witnessed like a murder a bounty should be accrued otherwise NPC could make some comment about being confused/ dizzy.

Anyway, its a valid discussion worth having and might help with the overall evolution of the game.

I would have "Vampire Hunter" NPCs that roamed cities and would just attack you if you came close enough to them to give the game more realism and life. There'd also be certain temples you couldn't enter and then a special area maybe only you could. Being a vampire would actually be a real choice instead of just passive buffs with little detriment

Knowledge

Ragged_Claw wrote: »

I've been a vampire on my main since early access and it is far from easy to maintain, that health regen is a killer (literally) try getting half-way through a trial and realising that you've forgotten your bloody Double Bloody Mara - and back in the day we didn't even have that. As it stands few (if any) of the skills are of any use and it's my experience that fewer players are bothering with it, unless for RP purposes. If anything I feel that both vamp and WW need some love, not punishment. As far as lore goes, what works in a single player game is not necessarily going to work in an MMO (there are at least a milliion threads on how the lore has changed in ESO). Also vampires spread vamprism, no? Why is it unbelievable that there would be so many vampires running around? Did you not read Dracula or Salem's Lot?? Joiiiin ussssss...

So, you'd advocate vampire passives without any detriment at all? We'd all just be vampires.

CompM4s

Just no.

rfennell_ESO

A great many vampires are vampires purely for the sneak speed.

The "problem" is there is no other realistic option for increasing stealthed movement speed.

Sure... there is a set, but giving up a 5 piece is far more a deal than being a vampire is. If there was an easier way to increase stealthed speed there would be less vampires.

If there is one issue I have with vampirism is how it's not even remotely punished by guards and cities.

Sevn

Why do you play ESO TC? It's obvious with every thread you make you're only interested in changing ESO into a completely different game, so why play eso? Just go play whatever game does all the things you keep suggesting.

Skullstachio

Knowledge wrote: »

Guarlet wrote: »

Knowledge wrote: »

Princess_Ciri wrote: »

no this is a bad idea

I think people deem it a bad idea because the majority are vampires and wish to be lazy without having to pay an upkeep cost.

It's a strange day when I agree with Knowledge, but this seems likely. As it is now vampires get a very nice sustain boost with relatively little to pay in return-- the extra fire damage taken and health regen reduction are both easily worked around.

Introducing an upkeep cost is an interesting idea, but that may prove more difficult to implement than the simpler alternative, just nerfing the passives a bit. It would be easy to kill vampire altogether if it wasn't done right, and that isn't desirable either.

First of all, there's nothing wrong with agreeing with me. I feel I have been misjudged by the forum members and have also been turned into a meme. This has devalued anything I say when in fact I actually have good ideas.

@Knowledge

I do not misjudge you, you are simply seeing something that other forum users may not be able to see (that & I have a vampire character & a werewolf character.) I get what you say though, every user (including yourself) has some good ideas they come up with, but do remember that Criticism is a "thing" on these forums & it may be wise to remember three of the several rules in the spoiler below so as to keep a clear mind & retain clarity. I know, because at times, I come up with some good ideas at times & not everyone will agree with it, but only through the peoples criticism will one be able to gain clarity & find something that all people can enjoy.

Agree to Disagree: We have a very diverse community of individuals and groups who have a variety of interests, opinions, and backgrounds. Just like in every-day life, you will not agree with all the opinions you encounter here, and that’s okay. It’s perfectly acceptable to disagree, but please do not put other people down for their opinions, ideas, or suggestions. In most discussions, there is no right or wrong, just different angles, opinions, and interests.
Be Civil and Respectful: Being civil and respectful goes a long way, especially when involved in a heated debate. It is possible to be civil and respectful, even when you strongly disagree with someone. Please remember that everyone on these forums is a real person, like you, who is also here because they love The Elder Scrolls Online and want to talk about it.
Share Constructive Criticism: We want to hear your thoughts and feedback on The Elder Scrolls Online, negative and positive alike. Please consider how you are posting criticism. If you want to share suggestions or constructive criticism about The Elder Scrolls Online, please tell us about it. It is possible to be negative, respectful, and constructive at the same time. When submitting feedback, consider whether or not what you’re posting will be something the Dev Team can use to turn into real change — constructive negative feedback can be a powerful tool to help us improve the game. Remember, we really do want your feedback!

there was one idea I had for vampires though, something along the lines of "Role-Reversing" some parts of the Vampirism.

for instance:

• Becoming a Vampire starts that Vampire off at stage four, which confers the 25% weakness to fire & 75% slower health regen but has 21% cost reduction for vampire abilities & early access to the Unnatural resistance* passive which further reduces the health recovery deterrent. (*Unnatural Resistance should now reduce the severity of the health recovery deterrent through stages 4-2 & grants immunity to poison & disease effects.). (it also gives the impression of being drained of what little life the new vampire has upon undergoing the ritual.)
• Feeding on victims raises vampire stage by 1, progressing from 4 to 3 and vice versa, stage 3 reduces the fire weakness to 20% and health recovery deterrent to 50% but reduces the cost reduction of vampire abilities to 14% whilst also unlocking the Dark Stalker* passive. (Dark Stalker still ignores the movement speed penalty of sneak but now, instead of reducing the time it takes to crouch at night by 50%, it now only increases it by 25%, except there is a gag to it, it increases in potency with each stage, Decreases the time it takes to Crouch by 25% during the night at Stage 3, 50% at stage 2 & 75% at stage 1. trust me when I say you will want to stay light on your feet when dealing with fully fed vampires since their supernatural reflexes make them a force to be reckoned with.)
• Feeding on a victim at stage 3 will progress to stage 2 which reduces the fire weakness to 15% & health Recovery Deterrent to 25% but reduce the cost reduction of vampire abilities to 7%, Stage 2 Unlocks Supernatural recovery which increases Stamina & Magicka Recovery by 10% which increases to 20% at stage 1 and unlocks savage feeding*. (Savage feeding no longer stuns enemies nor sets them off-balance, but much rather, allows vampires to frontally feed on a humanoid enemy while in combat to recover health & keep their vampire stage from dropping. this has a cooldown of 30 seconds which increases to 1 minute at stage 1.)
• Feeding on a victim at stage 2 will progress to stage 1 which mitigates the weakness to fire & the health recovery determent but no longer reduces the cost of vampire abilities, stage 1 also Unlocks the Undeath Passive which Reduces your damage taken by up to 33% based on your missing Health while you are below 60% Health.

Criticism is welcome here.

Note: I will be posting these vampire ideas in a future thread.

ShadowHvo

Healthy discussion aside, I find it rather ironic that I am being quoted from a thread asking for a lowkey buff to vampirism, in a thread asking for a massive nerf to it.

In my opinion, vampirism should be far stronger, but at the cost of burning in the sun and getting attacked by town guards. Im still hoping for them to give me a ghastly nose in stage 4 too.

We can all dream, eh.

wenchmore420b14_ESO

starkerealm wrote: »

Knowledge wrote: »

Despite everything you've just said people in this thread and other threads do agree with me and like some of my ideas.

That doesn't really mean much.

Right now, there's a thread where people are arguing that Shieldbreaker is detrimental to the game because it prevents them from running shield stacking sorcs in Cyrodiil, with DPS tier outgoing damage and tank survivability. Nevermind that Shieldbreaker is a 5pc set, and that's a substantial chunk of your build to counter one playstyle. Also, nevermind that almost no one actually runs shieldbreaker, or that its damage is hilariously low. Finally, let's forget that the set was created to deal with a rather uninteresting playstyle, which they'd like to bring back in full force.

Knowledge wrote: »

I would encourage you to avoid my threads if you don't like them or me.

Please observe whether people are agreeing with me in the future before attacking me falsely.

Just because someone agrees with you, doesn't make you correct. It simply means that, for whatever reason, someone else has signed on to your idea. Now, that can be emotionally gratifying, but it does not represent a coherent, rational, endorsement of your position.

For example: Many players, including some in this thread, hate vampires with a passion. They want to see vampires eliminated from the game entirely. They have their own, diverse, reasons, ranging from the aesthetic, the idea that they're evil creatures who should be stamped out, or even (in some cases) resentment over the bite market from back at launch.

Now, if you present an objectively bad balance suggestion for vampires, which would make them unplayable, of course those people will sign on. They'll agree with you, because they want vampires out of the game.

That doesn't validate your idea, it doesn't even suggest it's a good one, just that someone, somewhere, has a personal position which aligns with yours.

Or, the alternative is that we simply sum our Agrees and decide who is correct by voting fiat... at which point I've got 9,758 agrees and you have... 734. Yeah, let's not automatically devalue your input like that. Sounds like a bad idea.

@starkerealm , you get an agree from me!!!
Huzzah!!

Ackwalan

starkerealm wrote: »

Ackwalan wrote: »

starkerealm wrote: »

Ackwalan wrote: »

starkerealm wrote: »

Ackwalan wrote: »

Vampirism is in need of a change. When WW had an 8% stam regen even with no WW skills slotted, it was changed because to many people used it. Staying in stage 5 vamp and thus full benefits has no work involved. The +'s to stage 5 far out way the -'S, time to mix things up and put a little balance to it.

15%, not 8. You got the 15% recovery buff at all times.

You remember how vampires worked back then?

Your passives were always on. So you got your 10% magicka and stamina recovery buffs, your increased mitigation at low health, and your full movement in stealth even at Stage 1.

When Werewolves were changed, vampires got the exact same change. They needed to slot a vampire ability to retain those buffs.

Vampires were changed again with the Dark Brotherhood release, that's the current iteration of them.

It was 15% in WW form and 8% out of WW form. And the vamp buffs were always active no matter what was slotted.

It was 15%.

At launch, vampire buffs were always active, regardless of stage or if anything was slotted.

When werewolves were changed to require the ultimate to be slotted (I think this was with 1.6), vampires got an identical change. That requirement was later removed when vampires were overhauled with the Dark Brotherhood release.

While in WW form.

No. +40% Poison Damage while in Werewolf Form. The +15% Stam recovery was permanently on. Actually, the poison vulnerability also applied in human form at launch, as I recall, but that may have been a bug.

Also, the WW stam recovery was, basically, undocumented at launch. The tooltip wasn't updated until... 1.5, I think.

Nope. It was 15 in WW form and 8 when not. The poison was also only in WW form.

Gilvoth

Knowledge wrote: »

DoctorESO wrote: »

Summary of responses to the idea:

Vampires:




Non-Vampires:

Where do you stand on it, DoctorESO?

i think you have a great idea and you did great job presenting it, but you have created many other topics and threads so often and so much bashing and hurting others classes and skills and targeting other peoples builds with other threads that it makes it look like this is the same type of continued effect and desire.

your idea sounds fair but it will ruin other peoples builds that have vampirism and depend on those sneak speeds at stage 4 vampirism.

Knowledge

dwemer_paleologist wrote: »

Knowledge wrote: »

DoctorESO wrote: »

Summary of responses to the idea:

Vampires:




Non-Vampires:

Where do you stand on it, DoctorESO?

i think you have a great idea and you did great job presenting it, but you have created many other topics and threads so often and so much bashing and hurting others classes and skills and targeting other peoples builds with other threads that it makes it look like this is the same type of continued effect and desire.

your idea sounds fair but it will ruin other peoples builds that have vampirism and depend on those sneak speeds at stage 4 vampirism.

Why do you guys have to judge me?

DoctorESO

Knowledge wrote: »

DoctorESO wrote: »

Summary of responses to the idea:

Vampires:




Non-Vampires:

Where do you stand on it, DoctorESO?

Not sure. I'll have to think about it. I think it will make the game a lot less fun for a large proportion of players (the vampires). I envision ZOS creating a food item (like Bloody Mara) that keeps people satiated, and people will just eat this food every 3-6 hours.

Gilvoth

Knowledge wrote: »

dwemer_paleologist wrote: »

Knowledge wrote: »

DoctorESO wrote: »

Summary of responses to the idea:

Vampires:




Non-Vampires:

Where do you stand on it, DoctorESO?

i think you have a great idea and you did great job presenting it, but you have created many other topics and threads so often and so much bashing and hurting others classes and skills and targeting other peoples builds with other threads that it makes it look like this is the same type of continued effect and desire.

your idea sounds fair but it will ruin other peoples builds that have vampirism and depend on those sneak speeds at stage 4 vampirism.

Why do you guys have to judge me?

no judgement at all, and especially no judgement is meant at you. we are simply trying to protect our class and our builds, and your threads are worded to disrupt and destroy many passives and skills and entire eso designs that would anger alot of people if they do what your suggesting, and would also take alot of time to try to regain fair pvp and pve abilities.

no judgement against you at all, just want to keep what we have in game.
nothing about this is targeted at you as a person, no, this is targeted at protecting our classes and skills and abilities and not letting those things be tooken away from us that we pay real life money for every month.