A bit off topic, but why has ZAM gone with the Original nomenclature instead of Classic, which seems be traditionally used by pretty much all EQ players across the board?
I didn't think Classic was a good label for the origin of the game. I know veterans use that label for before Kunark, however classic Everquest by definition can mean a number of the older expansions as well. Just like describing you like classic cars. Well, what year make and model are we talking about here? I thought about naming it Everquest but that might have been confusing to some since that is the name of the game. Original made sense by definition to explain the order of things. Plus our Era tag for quests have been using Original for that era since forever.
Just to be clear: As I remember it, the original PoP on rollout didn't have "spell vendors". Those were added later to make things easier to get older spells - but this happened later (not sure which expansion). The 1 quest guy for parchment turn-ins per class who was also a vendor - who had 1 spell on him. That spell was the post 60 spell that each class was given - without parchments. There is no other way to get those spells as they were available through a vendor. Just in case my memory was a little fuzzy, the release of PoP was October 29 2002. Do a simple google search, I found an old thread on Graffe's the wizard forums from early November 2002 discussing Firebolt of Tallon. There were a lot of complaints about the overall power of the spell vs wizard spells, etc. But forgetting that - and focus on a couple of key phrases. Here is the link: https://www.graffe.com/forums/showthread.php?4140-Firebolt-of-Tallon-doesn-t-make-sense Here are a few quotes: I think I had a better idea for the level 61 magician vendor spell: As a mage I'm more about pets than nukes, and it should have been a pet on the vendor. I'm pretty sure I could dig back through the way back machine to find more, but this is pretty good evidence that the Firebolt of Tallon nuke was available through a vendor and it was "the" spell that was on the vendor. Every class had one, and I think we still have to continue to construct that list (and thank you to those who contributed). I just want to make sure we get that list together and some developer comment, otherwise these spells will be unavailable (since research is disabled) for quite some time.
Can confirm absolutely that the cleric remedy spell is supposed to be vendor sold and isn't (shouldn't be) available through parchment turn ins. I was a cleric main then and a cleric main now and remember with no doubt that we got ONE bought spell and the rest were turn ins. The vendor is missing and it seems to be the same for all the classes one bought spell. It can't really be added to the turn in list since that would mess things up for people who purchase it on servers where the vendor is live. We need the vendors with era appropriate spells added back for this progression and all future progression servers. That said, I'm surviving just fine without remedy but it is a tool that would be nice to have.
This same exact issue occurred in 2012, and the missing spells are BOUGHT not quested: https://forums.daybreakgames.com/eq/index.php?threads/pop-vendor-bought-lvl-61-spells.196055/ The spells were finally patched in a few months later: http://everquest.allakhazam.com/story.html?story=29987 *** Progression Servers *** - Corrected several spells that were not available on the updated Plane of Knowledge vendors at the appropriate time. DB - Please add the missing spells to the appropriate vendors. Thank you!
Dev acknowledgement would be nice. These need to be added to vendors ASAP. And for the person saying they got Apathy from a parchment turn in, you're crazy, you can't get it from a turn in, these spells are currently not in the game.
I wonder if it would be difficult to throw all the missing spells on a new merchant just for that? For future progression servers as well.
None of the clerics in my guild have it. We have all turned in a metric fuckton of parchments so we must be unlucky. None of our guild enchanters have Apathy. Honestly, i wont believe it until i see someone casting it or we get dev confirmation.
I'm with you. People keep saying someone in their guild has it, but I have yet to group with someone that has any of these spells, and I've never seen one for sale. I've seen EVERY other parchment turn in spell for sale, so why would these be any different? They weren't part of the original rewards for the parchment turn in because they were available to purchase on the vendor you turned the parchment into. I highly doubt someone went in and added these spells to the ones you can get from the parchment turn in. So until I actually see someone in game casting the spell, it's all hearsay to me.
It honestly looks like they are either unable or too lazy to revert the vendors to only having era appropriate stuff, so they just took the vendor out. Same thing happened with rogue poisons, as we do not even have the cheap pop era vendor poison available as far as I can tell
BARD: Saryrn's Scream of Pain - from vendor Minstrel Cirsaelle CLERIC: Supernal Remedy - from vendor Vicar Ceraen DRUID: Replenishment - from vendor Wanderer Astobin SHAMAN: Replenishment - from vendor Mystic Abomin ENCHANTER: Apathy - from vendor Illusionist Jerup MAGICIAN: Firebolt of Tallon - from vendor Elementalist Somat NECROMANCER: Dark Plague - from vendor Heretic Drahur WIZARD: Lure of Thunder - from vendor Channeler Keatrem I posted this info from the older thread. It seems that these spells were NOT originally sold by the 61+ spell vendor, but instead were originally sold by a lower level spell vendor. As such, it should be easy to put them back in the game and avoid the mess of trying to get the 61+ vendor in the game and NOT have every other spell being sold. Please add these much needed spells back onto the original lower level spell vendors.
It looks like the patch that was supposed to put these spells in game and back on those vendors, never actually patched them in.
I know removing hate 2.0 is super important and all, but any chance we could get these spells added back to the game? Any response would be greatly appreciated.
Just speculating....but is it possible he's avoiding this thread because there actually is a way to obtain the spells, and he wants us to figure it out? I know research got borked, but has anyone actually tried to research these particular 61 spells?
