[<a href='12666.html'>Next Message in Time</a>] | 
[<a href='12664.html'>Previous Message in Time</a>] | 
[<a href='12666.html'>Next Message in Topic</a>] | 
[<a href='12663.html'>Previous Message in Topic</a>] <br/><br/>
<b>Message ID:</b> 12665 <br/>
<b>Date:</b> Thu Jan  6 20:22:36 GMT 2000 <br/>
<b>Author:</b> Ryan Honeyman <br/>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: Required times to memorize songs <br/>
<br/><br/>
<div id="ygrps-yiv-127559416"><blockquote><span title="ireply">&gt; Good idea? Waste of time? Better way to gather the data?<br/>
<br/>
 </span></blockquote>  It takes me 15 to 20 seconds to memmorize the L50 song, no joke.<br/>
  It takes me about 5 seconds to memmorize the L1 song.<br/>
<br/>
  This is absolutely ridiculous; a L50 caster can mem a L49<br/>
  spell in a a few seconds, and the L1 spells... hah... fraction<br/>
  of a second.  You can barely see the bar move.  It&#39;s just done.<br/>
<br/>
  I do believe someone at Verant was looking into this.  Since<br/>
  spell casters got something pretty at L35 (no spellbook), I think<br/>
  bards (also treated like casters) should get something too.<br/>
<br/>
  Dying and getting the songs needed back into slots takes me about<br/>
  2 to 3 mins.  Most casters are done in less than 30 seconds.<br/>
<br/>
  You&#39;ve got to prove that there is no misbalance in letting bards<br/>
  mem songs faster... and I mean to the tune of 75% reduction in<br/>
  song mem time.  What takes 4 seconds, should only take 1.  What <br/>
  takes 20 seconds, would take 5.  And still we would be slower<br/>
  than our magicuser equivalent.<br/>
<br/>
  Harm.</div>