Stoneskin, Barbskin and Shadowsheild Visual effect

[Drakill Tannan]

I hate the Visual effects of barbskin/stoneskin, don't mind much about the shadowshield one, but the others are just disruptive to me, even in a fantasy world, i feel they are out of context, if you are a druid you'll likely won't be able to have a nice outfit because most of the time it will be made entirely of dull stone/wood, probably happens to wizards too (although they have more choices). Also i find it ilogical, supposedly the character's skin turns into stone, not all his/her clothing, helmet, shield... i guess it makes more sence on animal compaions, but i still hate it.

So i thought, maybe there should be an option to remove the visual effect of this spells, while keeping the benefits, it could be done though a chat command or a player tool maybe, activated after the spell has been cast, that removes the visual effect.

Anyway, i know it's doable, although i don't know if it can be made for each player to individually decide, but it could improve the visual game for me, and maybe for others.

[Sandstorm]

It is doable, but I'm against it. Very clear visual effects should remain very clear.

[ExileStrife]

I don't mind the stoneskin one that much, but I hate everybody walking around and looking like TREES.  Removing the visual effect unfortunately isn't the best choice since I think the spell does warrant some kind of representation.  However, surprisingly, very recently there were some changes to combat the army-of-trees effect that may soon become more prevalent in game.

[The Crimson Magician]

We don't want you to hide your buffs. :(

[Letsplayforfun]

Leave as is, IMO. It shows the buffs, the powers of the person, the probable allegiance (bark), etc. Tuning down all visual effects is kinda sad. We don't have to like them all.

[Cruzel]

The BARK effect could b replaced with the BROWN GLOW. (On caster choice maybe?)

[AllMYBudgies]

I have always liked Barkskin, myself.

[War horse]

You can also disgusie yourself as a statue with stoneskin. Help's when your trying to listen in! >_>

[IxTheSpeedy]

I like both affects but I do find it slightly silly when some folks walk around covered in barkskin all the time.  That's just personal preference though.

[Ivan]

These folks are called "druids" and have rather limited armor option on EfU:A :D.

I like being able to see if someone's buffed with obvious powerful defensive spells. It can even be an intimidation factor if they are suspicious of a potential attack.

[IxTheSpeedy]

I know they're called druids...  I was trying not to druid-bash, I love em' but just think it's semi-funny looking en masse.

[Porkolt]

if you are a druid you'll likely won't be able to have a nice outfit because most of the time it will be made entirely of dull stone/wood

Because Druids really do their best to show off the latest Armani loincloths.

[Porkolt]

Because Druids really do their best to show off the latest Armani loincloths.

[TheMoonlightBecomesYou]

Because Druids really do their best to show off the latest Armani loincloths.

I lol'd.

[Egon the Monkey]

I'd say go for this, because then it's one of the reasons for the duration nerf of Stoneskin removed (It looks ugly if every wizard is a statue), and wizards/sorcs can finally have their Level 4 defensive buffer doing what it's supposed to do. Being able to give you any-time protection from a first strike you aren't expecting, and buy time to set off spells.