TURTLES, BEARS & COOKIE-CUTTER RAIDS

Responding to my earlier post about Nornúan, the great turtle of the Waterworks, "Anonymous" commented that his kinship had worked out a tactic which involved using a Lore-master's bear to tank the turtle: "A burg can provoke the turtle so it doesn't switch targets so no one gets an acid dot. The healer just keeps the bear up. Dead simple." I was intrigued enough to suggest the tactic to my own kin a couple of days later, only to discover to my astonishment that it was regarded as an exploit. Though I have not been able to find anything to that effect on the official English Codemasters forums, a kinsman tracked down and translated a Danish language post in which the tactic was condemned in no uncertain terms by a GM:

[18:22] +Forgildan: Hello Traxie, I am Game Master Forgildan. You have exploited the turtle raid. Therefore you will now receive a warning. Please do not exploit again in the future.
[18:22] +Forgildan: Next time we catch you doing this, a 7 day suspension will be the outcome.
[18:25] +Forgildan: I just checked your forums. It seems that this announcement has not yet been made on the english forums. As this is the case, I will drop the official warnings, so your accounts have not been marked as exploiters
[18:26] +Forgildan: But please do not attempt bear-tanking again. If we catch you again, they will be marked as such.

So there you have it: bear-tanking is an exploit. My first reaction was to be seriously annoyed; how could bear-tanking possibly be considered an exploit, other than because it happened to run contrary to the way the designers thought this battle should be fought? Coming on top of the forthcoming nerf of the Burglar's Enrage trick, the implication is that there can only be one way to complete an instance, graven in stone as Holy Writ - anything else is heresy. For me, and for many other players, the whole point of a difficult instance is that can be fun to work out different ways of completing it, some sneakier than others. A designer policy of turning all LOTRO instances into cookie-cutter exercises does not bode well.

In fact, it turns out that there is a reason of sorts for the pet-tanking ban, which is that in the Nornúan fight, a pet does not trigger the "snapping" attack and hence does not get landed with the acid DOT (damage over time) debuff. Using this tactic, Nornúan was actually duoed by a LM and Minstrel on the Snowborn server earlier this month (the debate on the link goes far beyond this issue, by the way). So on balance, I think one has to accept that bear-tanking the Turtle does rather make a mockery of the whole concept of raiding. At the same time, it would be nice if these things could be tidied up prior to general release.

BOOK 7 AND THE END OF EXPLOITS

Volume II, Book 7 is due to hit Europe tomorrow, Thursday, just over two weeks after it was released in the States and a week after the first official release date. Not too bad, particularly if some of the more glaring bugs in the US release have been dealt with. I was particularly happy to see that the community's response to the probably inevitable delay has been much more muted and sensible than in the past - far less of that screaming, throwing the rattle out of the playpen, "want it now!" attitude we've seen in the past. Evidence of a more mature or of a wiser and more experienced audience? Either way, a relief.

Apart from the very welcome new content, Book 7 will hopefully also eliminate all those blatant exploits in the Moria instances which have been straining consciences and provoking arguments in PUGs for months. You know the ones I mean: the strange but indubitable fact that in many cases, if you stand in a doorway, you can hit a boss but he can't hit you. And yes, of course they are exploits, irrespective of the fact that they should have been (but weren't) fixed weeks ago. Principled players should (and mostly do) avoid making use of them, but the temptation is always there, particularly if you are called upon to repeat the 16th Hall instance for perhaps the thirtieth time, purely in order to complete somebody's radiant armour set. In some ways, this may well be the strongest argument against the the policy of requiring players to collect a specific set of armour before trying a particular raid (in this case, the Watcher): the fact that it became tedious enough to lead many players into the temptation of cutting corners. If all goes as planned, that temptation should soon be removed.