Goblin Squad Member
|
@ Illililili:
Damage factors work exactly the same for expendables as they do for attacks. Keywords work marginally different (7 per match instead of 5, and no majors/minors).
There's also no guarantee of matching 3 keywords. It depends on what Class Feature and level in that Feature you are using.
===============================================
Maximum possible damage with a cleric expendable:
Vengeful Storm: 562 (5.46 damage factor, 9/9 matched with Fire Domain 11)
Harm: 535 (6.53 damage factor, 6/7 matched with Weather Domain 7+)
Symbol of Death: 509 (6.21 damage factor, 6/8 matched with Charm/Fire/Glory/Travel Domain 10+)
This of course assumes 0 resistance on the target and a full hit. Note that with high damage factors damage drops off fast with resistance as D = (1-p)*f*(b-r)
D=damage
p=penalty for not getting full hit
f=damage factor
b=base damage
r=resistanceTrivially:
dD/dr = (1-p)*f*-1 = -f*(1-p)
So as f increases dD/dr gets more negative, ie. the damage drops off faster.
A rule of thumb:
When two attacks do similar damage against 0 resistance, choose the one with a lower damage factor. That is, if they have a different number of matched keywords and damage factors and yet do comparable damage against 0 resistance then the one with fewer matches and higher damage factor will drop off in damage faster than the other as the target's resistance increases. Rogues utilizing sneak attack against low resistance (<10 physical) targets should ignore this rule if comparing pre sneak attack damage.
However, if you have two attacks which target the same defense (fort/ref/will) and the same resistance then (assuming neither has 'precise' or 'penetrating' and both have the same keywords):
The attack more damaging attack against r1 with also be the more damaging against r2.
(Apologies for all the edits!)
Wow. This is exactly the kind of analysis that many of us will be looking for as we get comfortable with the basic systems and start looking for ways to get the most out of them. Thank you.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
How are the attack rolls determined for expendables if I am holding a weapon or staff but have Cleric expendables slotted? Do they use the equipped item? Or do they use the attack roll for a theoretical item of the appropriate type?
I believe L4-6 expendables automatically get the T2 roll, and L7-9 automatically get the T3 roll. You have to have a T2 or T3 implement in order to slot those expendables in the first place, so there's no need for further equipment gating.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Killing Joke matching three Keywords can hit for a max damage of around 130. Basic Longbow Exploit with Master of Opportunity: Suffer can hit for a max damage of around 230.
Doesn't Killing Joke have a 4 second stun attached to it? That is significant to a straight damage comparison.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Doesn't Killing Joke have a 4 second stun attached to it?
If the Target is Distreessed, yes.
My point was not that Wizards aren't useful. My point was that they're not really "glass cannons" - they're "glass" sure enough, but there are other Roles which dish out significantly more pure damage.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Thanks!
So, if you "miss" by 10, you do 80% damage
if you miss by "20", you do 71% damage
if you miss by "50", you do 55% damage
if you miss by "100", you do 37% damage.One other question:
Attacks, cantrips, and orisons base to hit roll is from the weapon/staff/focus held. How are the attack rolls determined for expendables if I am holding a weapon or staff but have Cleric expendables slotted? Do they use the equipped item? Or do they use the attack roll for a theoretical item of the appropriate type?
Weapons basically have little to do with attack rolls. They'll simply there to match keywords on your attacks. Matching Masterwork (T2) and the T3 major keyword improves your roll, but other than that your weapon has nothing to do with your attack roll. The attack roll is based on your attack bonus of the appropriate type for that given attack.
The tier of the rolls for expendables are based on the implement, though as Guurzak mentioned you need a certain minimum tier of implement to slot higher level expendables. The attack bonus used is based on the expendable.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The tier of the rolls for expendables are based on the implement, though as Guurzak mentioned you need a certain minimum tier of implement to slot higher level expendables. The attack bonus used is based on the expendable.
OK, I understand that expendable keyword matching comes from slotted roles like school or domain.
I also am clear that there are T1 T2 and T3 implements.
However what i am hazy about is whether a level 1 spell on a T2 implement gets a T1 attack roll (lowest of 3 dice) or a T2 attack roll (middle of 3 dice).
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The tier of the rolls for expendables are based on the implement, though as Guurzak mentioned you need a certain minimum tier of implement to slot higher level expendables. The attack bonus used is based on the expendable.
OK, I understand that expendable keyword matching comes from slotted roles like school or domain.
I also am clear that there are T1 T2 and T3 implements.
However what i am hazy about is whether a level 1 spell on a T2 implement gets a T1 attack roll (lowest of 3 dice) or a T2 attack roll (middle of 3 dice).
Based on the quote from Stephen I'd imagine it gets the T2 roll.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My point was not that Wizards aren't useful. My point was that they're not really "glass cannons" - they're "glass" sure enough, but there are other Roles which dish out significantly more pure damage.
Which really follows the precedent set by tabletop pathfinder. If you want big damage numbers, you take an archer or a barbarian.
You take a wizard for control and effects that supersede mere damage.
If its possible to eventually translate that into PFO, wizards will be great fun.
In the current state, I agree, wizards are much too squishy and damage is the primary thing that matters in combat.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My point was not that Wizards aren't useful. My point was that they're not really "glass cannons" - they're "glass" sure enough, but there are other Roles which dish out significantly more pure damage.Which really follows the precedent set by tabletop pathfinder. If you want big damage numbers, you take an archer or a barbarian.
You take a wizard for control and effects that supersede mere damage.
If its possible to eventually translate that into PFO, wizards will be great fun.
In the current state, I agree, wizards are much too squishy and damage is the primary thing that matters in combat.
In TT (especialy pre-pathfinder) traditionally the fighters and barbarians are the low level combat monsters divine casters can sort of hold their own and wizards are fragile but occasionally useful, by level 10 or 12 the divine casters (Druids and Battle Clerics) took over as the melee combat monsters and arcane casters started to show benefits and by level 20 there was very little to compete with an arcane caster throwing level 9 spells around.
What has changed with MMOs is this new idea that all classes must be balanced against each other at all levels from beginning to max level. That is not the way it traditionally worked in TT.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
In TT (especialy pre-pathfinder) traditionally the fighters and barbarians are the low level combat monsters divine casters can sort of hold their own and wizards are fragile but occasionally useful, by level 10 or 12 the divine casters (Druids and Battle Clerics) took over as the melee combat monsters and arcane casters started to show benefits and by level 20 there was very little to compete with an arcane caster throwing level 9 spells around.
In Pathfinder, Archers and Barbarians are the best at pure dps, hitpoint damage even at level 20.
I absolutely agree that in TT, there is very little to compete with a 9th level spell, but those spells are typically not used to deal hit point damage.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
In TT (especialy pre-pathfinder) traditionally the fighters and barbarians are the low level combat monsters divine casters can sort of hold their own and wizards are fragile but occasionally useful, by level 10 or 12 the divine casters (Druids and Battle Clerics) took over as the melee combat monsters and arcane casters started to show benefits and by level 20 there was very little to compete with an arcane caster throwing level 9 spells around.In Pathfinder, Archers and Barbarians are the best at pure dps, hitpoint damage even at level 20.
I absolutely agree that in TT, there is very little to compete with a 9th level spell, but those spells are typically not used to deal hit point damage.
Yeah one of the changes they seemed to make in the transition to Pathfinder was a slight nerfing of divine casters in combat and moving the combat cleric role more to the Paladin class.
The other issue that comes up in MMOs is level 9 style spells are a touch to godlike in a game where several thousand people can cast them. The lore in TT is basically by the time your character reaches level 20 he is capable of demolishing small cities by himself and is one of only a handful of individuals on the planet with that sort of capability.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
In TT (especialy pre-pathfinder) traditionally the fighters and barbarians are the low level combat monsters divine casters can sort of hold their own and wizards are fragile but occasionally useful, by level 10 or 12 the divine casters (Druids and Battle Clerics) took over as the melee combat monsters and arcane casters started to show benefits and by level 20 there was very little to compete with an arcane caster throwing level 9 spells around.In Pathfinder, Archers and Barbarians are the best at pure dps, hitpoint damage even at level 20.
I absolutely agree that in TT, there is very little to compete with a 9th level spell, but those spells are typically not used to deal hit point damage.
Yeah one of the changes they seemed to make in the transition to Pathfinder was a slight nerfing of divine casters in combat and moving the combat cleric role more to the Paladin class.
The other issue that comes up in MMOs is level 9 style spells are a touch to godlike in a game where several thousand people can cast them. The lore in TT is basically by the time your character reaches level 20 he is capable of demolishing small cities by himself and is one of only a handful of individuals on the planet with that sort of capability.
This is all true regarding TT. I am not asking for the ability to destroy whole cities though am I? What I am saying is arcane castors are the squishiest and therefore they should be able to do equal if not better dmg then all the less squishy classes. Is that reasonable?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
This is all true regarding TT. I am not asking for the ability to destroy whole cities though am I? What I am saying is arcane castors are the squishiest and therefore they should be able to do equal if not better dmg then all the less squishy classes. Is that reasonable?In TT (especialy pre-pathfinder) traditionally the fighters and barbarians are the low level combat monsters divine casters can sort of hold their own and wizards are fragile but occasionally useful, by level 10 or 12 the divine casters (Druids and Battle Clerics) took over as the melee combat monsters and arcane casters started to show benefits and by level 20 there was very little to compete with an arcane caster throwing level 9 spells around.In Pathfinder, Archers and Barbarians are the best at pure dps, hitpoint damage even at level 20.
I absolutely agree that in TT, there is very little to compete with a 9th level spell, but those spells are typically not used to deal hit point damage.
Yeah one of the changes they seemed to make in the transition to Pathfinder was a slight nerfing of divine casters in combat and moving the combat cleric role more to the Paladin class.
The other issue that comes up in MMOs is level 9 style spells are a touch to godlike in a game where several thousand people can cast them. The lore in TT is basically by the time your character reaches level 20 he is capable of demolishing small cities by himself and is one of only a handful of individuals on the planet with that sort of capability.
No, it's not reasonable in a game where range and penetration are factors.
Wizards have very little physical resistance, but Warriors have very little magical resistance. That heavy armored warrior you're fighting is just as squishy as your cloth-wearing mage in this game. They even have about the same number of hitpoints. So what happens when the two start trading blows? The higher damage wins. If you had wizards with damage surpassing physical weapons, they would ALWAYS win. Now add range, crowd control, and wizard buffs to the mix. It becomes severely slanted towards the caster.
Now add the fact that wizards already do have expendables with greater damage output than anything a physical class can deal while targeting saving throws they are weak against and said physical classes have nothing for megaburst. This is not World of Warcraft where my rogue has Sinister Strike or a slew of stuns. Warriors have consistent dps output with a few snares and charges. If you need even more advantages to win as a mage, you're doing it wrong.
The server is still low level. Low level casters get shit on in every RPG. Later, those mega spells are going to be the meta.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
This is all true regarding TT. I am not asking for the ability to destroy whole cities though am I? What I am saying is arcane castors are the squishiest and therefore they should be able to do equal if not better dmg then all the less squishy classes. Is that reasonable?In TT (especialy pre-pathfinder) traditionally the fighters and barbarians are the low level combat monsters divine casters can sort of hold their own and wizards are fragile but occasionally useful, by level 10 or 12 the divine casters (Druids and Battle Clerics) took over as the melee combat monsters and arcane casters started to show benefits and by level 20 there was very little to compete with an arcane caster throwing level 9 spells around.In Pathfinder, Archers and Barbarians are the best at pure dps, hitpoint damage even at level 20.
I absolutely agree that in TT, there is very little to compete with a 9th level spell, but those spells are typically not used to deal hit point damage.
Yeah one of the changes they seemed to make in the transition to Pathfinder was a slight nerfing of divine casters in combat and moving the combat cleric role more to the Paladin class.
The other issue that comes up in MMOs is level 9 style spells are a touch to godlike in a game where several thousand people can cast them. The lore in TT is basically by the time your character reaches level 20 he is capable of demolishing small cities by himself and is one of only a handful of individuals on the planet with that sort of capability.
No, it's not reasonable in a game where range and penetration are factors.
Wizards have very little physical resistance, but Warriors have very little magical resistance. That heavy armored warrior you're fighting is just as squishy as your cloth-wearing mage in this game. They even have about the same number of hitpoints. So what happens when the two start trading blows? The higher...
"about the same hit point's" LMFAO. You would have a point if casting spells did not root the caster. As it stands EVERY fight ends up melee range verry fast. Every non useless arcane feat PROVOKES OPPORTUNITY. You also wrongly assume that no arcane spells target fortitude rather than will or reflex. In fact deaths wail the highest dmg arcane spell is melee range has a cooldown of 2.9! and targets FORTITUDE. Wraiths cry the second highest dmg arcane spell is melee range and targets FORTITUDE. Wither the third highes arcane spell targets FORTITUDE. the next two down the list do target reflex but if you are a warrior with low reflex YOU'RE DOING IT WRONG. Kinda like how arcane castors are gimped as a one winged bird. Now there is the control factor but I cannot comment on the efficacy of that as it does not work yet.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
1) Spells rooting a caster has no bearing on HP. Whether casting in melee or casting at range, the relative health values remain similar. Melee range is going to happen one way or the other because of the 20m range on Charges and the ability for warriors to spam them without cooldown. Which is why this is not World of Warcraft and classes are not balanced for 1v1 combat. A warrior is either going to rip a solo caster apart or be kited to death at 20m-35m and never even get into range of him. Speedy Rogues will Longbows will do the same, and clerics with any speed buffs can simply run away and heal. The game is not going to be fair if you're solo, group combat is the focus point.
Also, the rooting is only TEMPORARY until they implement the full system. Without rooting casters would just kite people to death easily.
2) I don't assume no arcane spells target Fortitude, rather there are arcane spells targeting all the saves, unlike the Reflex exclusive warrior attacks. There are arcane spells targeting all the elements, unlike the Physical exclusive warrior attacks. There exists options for casters, along with range and strong crowd control, so you can customize your attack patterns to the enemy.
3) Warriors have always been good against Death magic, hence the fortitude resistance to the most lethal spells. Don't complain about a 2.9 cooldown on a spell dealing ungodly amounts of armor-ignoring damage in AOE when even a less-damaging single target Greatsword has a 2.0 cooldown and can be interrupted just like any spell can. Those lethal spells are for wiping out the ranged dps and healers, not the tanks. However, if you think warriors will have high Reflex, you haven't seen the 20 point heavy armor penalty. If you want to take the Reflex Bonus past 4, you're going to need to start investing in something other than Strength skills because of ability score requirements. Warriors are not going to have high Reflex bonuses unless they're aiming to be Archers, and at that point they're wearing medium anyway.
There's a lot you can't comment on right now because you haven't seen its efficiency yet. The game is at its earliest stages, barely a game at all, yet there's your doom and gloom about how casters are gimped without so much as leveling one first. Don't be the level 7 wizard complaining on some MMO forum that his class sucks, you'll only get told to level it up and learn it first.
Also, a lot of the tricks we can do right now are from lack of ability requirements. At tier 3, good luck having the same build. Specialization and weapon focus is going to set players apart a year from now. We're not going to be able to run around with longbows, heavy armor, and still murder everyone. Not to mention: if there's legitimate balance issues once the game develops, they'll be fixed.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
1) Spells rooting a caster has no bearing on HP. Whether casting in melee or casting at range, the relative health values remain similar. Melee range is going to happen one way or the other because of the 20m range on Charges and the ability for warriors to spam them without cooldown. Which is why this is not World of Warcraft and classes are not balanced for 1v1 combat. A warrior is either going to rip a solo caster apart or be kited to death at 20m-35m and never even get into range of him. Speedy Rogues will Longbows will do the same, and clerics with any speed buffs can simply run away and heal. The game is not going to be fair if you're solo, group combat is the focus point.
Also, the rooting is only TEMPORARY until they implement the full system. Without rooting casters would just kite people to death easily.
2) I don't assume no arcane spells target Fortitude, rather there are arcane spells targeting all the saves, unlike the Reflex exclusive warrior attacks. There are arcane spells targeting all the elements, unlike the Physical exclusive warrior attacks. There exists options for casters, along with range and strong crowd control, so you can customize your attack patterns to the enemy.
3) Warriors have always been good against Death magic, hence the fortitude resistance to the most lethal spells. Don't complain about a 2.9 cooldown on a spell dealing ungodly amounts of armor-ignoring damage in AOE when even a less-damaging single target Greatsword has a 2.0 cooldown and can be interrupted just like any spell can. Those lethal spells are for wiping out the ranged dps and healers, not the tanks. However, if you think warriors will have high Reflex, you haven't seen the 20 point heavy armor penalty. If you want to take the Reflex Bonus past 4, you're going to need to start investing in something other than Strength skills because of ability score requirements. Warriors are not going to have high Reflex bonuses unless they're aiming to be Archers, and at that point they're wearing...
When did I ever say rooting effected hp. There is a co relation it's called melee range damage. Character level is irrelevant to the conversation as progression is linear and the feats and numbers are known. Customizing your patters has merit only if one of those patterns will work against an equivalent lvl adversary rather then loosing automatically against ALL other classes of equivalent lvl. Weather you are fighting solo or in a group currently the advantage will ALWAYS be to an equivalent group in level with less arcane casters and more of ANY other class. That my friend means arcane casters are gimped. Can you tell me what role arcane castors can excel at over other classes in group or solo combat?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Melee range damage has no correlation when it is still lower than the spellcasting damage. Unless you're talking about the cantrips, in which case we're right back to square one declaring CANTRIPS are NOT how WIZARDS fight.
Arcane casters surpass others in AOE damage and the buffs they can bring to the table, just like every other RPG. You don't pick casters for damage, never have. EverQuest, World of Warcraft, DAOC, D&D, FFXIV, RIFT, Lotro insert whatever fantasy RPG you'd care to and its the Melee classes with the most DPS output. In some games they don't show it in raid fights because they have to move around a lot more than the casters or control their aggro even more to keep from yanking off the tank. Rogues, Assassins, Hunters, Rangers, Berserkers... these are kings of DPS, not the wizards. Not unless the fight involves high physical resistances, strong anti-melee mechanics, or some specific special ability given to the casters. In PVP, the archer especially is well-known as being the bane of casters, the anti-mage.
Casters will be and always have been support. A typical MMO group has 1 tank, 1 healer, and several DPS. Well, here we have Warriors who DPS, Rogues who DPS, and Clerics who DPS. If Wizards were the only DPS class worth bringing to a fight, there'd never be anything else. As with Darkfall and DDO, you WILL see tons of physical classes making up the damage output. And why shouldn't you? Paladin, Barbarian, Fighter, Rogue, Ranger, Bard, Monk... seven weapon users next to the Cleric, Druid, Wizard, and Sorcerer. The better question is if Wizards could buff, debuff, stun, slow, and outdamage everyone, why bring any other kind of dps to a fight?
If you're playing a caster, look at your spell list to figure out your role. Fireball... Lightning Bolt... Haste... Slow... Meteor Swarm... Stun... Strength... they're LOADED with AOE and support spells. Heck, the best buff in the game currently is Energetic Field and it's a bloody cantrip. Let's see how well that Warrior can buff his allies by swinging his sword at them.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Melee range damage has no correlation when it is still lower than the spellcasting damage. Unless you're talking about the cantrips, in which case we're right back to square one declaring CANTRIPS are NOT how WIZARDS fight.
Arcane casters surpass others in AOE damage and the buffs they can bring to the table, just like every other RPG. You don't pick casters for damage, never have. EverQuest, World of Warcraft, DAOC, D&D, FFXIV, RIFT, Lotro insert whatever fantasy RPG you'd care to and its the Melee classes with the most DPS output. In some games they don't show it in raid fights because they have to move around a lot more than the casters or control their aggro even more to keep from yanking off the tank. Rogues, Assassins, Hunters, Rangers, Berserkers... these are kings of DPS, not the wizards. Not unless the fight involves high physical resistances, strong anti-melee mechanics, or some specific special ability given to the casters. In PVP, the archer especially is well-known as being the bane of casters, the anti-mage.
Casters will be and always have been support. A typical MMO group has 1 tank, 1 healer, and several DPS. Well, here we have Warriors who DPS, Rogues who DPS, and Clerics who DPS. If Wizards were the only DPS class worth bringing to a fight, there'd never be anything else. As with Darkfall and DDO, you WILL see tons of physical classes making up the damage output. And why shouldn't you? Paladin, Barbarian, Fighter, Rogue, Ranger, Bard, Monk... seven weapon users next to the Cleric, Druid, Wizard, and Sorcerer. The better question is if Wizards could buff, debuff, stun, slow, and outdamage everyone, why bring any other kind of dps to a fight?
If you're playing a caster, look at your spell list to figure out your role. Fireball... Lightning Bolt... Haste... Slow... Meteor Swarm... Stun... Strength... they're LOADED with AOE and support spells. Heck, the best buff in the game currently is Energetic Field and it's a bloody cantrip. Let's see how well that Warrior can buff...
I don't know why you would bring up energetic field as its being made much less powerful as of ee3 release notes(mostly due to your complaining about it). Divine casters do waaaay more AOE damage so donno what that's about. DDO is great because they did NOT root casters or rangers and many spells like wall of fire and web can be cast strategically at areas rather than mobs. I will stop there because when ever anyone brings up DDO I get pretty upset that this game is not a sandbox version of that one. You didn't really outline a role directly but correct me if im wrong you are saying arcane casters should be crowd control? Well I would agree with that if the stuns and slows worked or the knockback had enough range to stop more then half a second of dps. They do not and we are gimped. I will also state arcane casters should do AT LEAST the same dmg as divine castors.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Energetic Field is not being made less powerful, it's being given a cooldown so it can be spammed less often. It's still the best buff in the game and with two wizards casting it, your group can have it up permanently. I did outline the role rather directly... area effect damage and buffs/debuffs. Never said crowd control was their role, though they do have some spells with it for PVP combat. Bugs do not make casters gimped, those are things you CAN complain about it. Things like knockback aren't for keeping your enemy away from you permanently, they're for pushing them back towards your group and away from you (i.e. RPG balance is not about solo play; you'd be suicidal to go solo in PFO anyway). DDO had its own balance issues with casters with Wall of Fire being nerfed late in its cycle to no longer be the king of DPS (now has a limit of like five mobs). But who DID do all the DPS? The physical classes. If you look at the spells divine casters have to offer, some of them are melee range. And from a D&D/Pathfinder standpoint, Clerics have always outdpsed Wizards. Compare Firestorm and Harm to Meteor Swarm and Disintegrate. Flame Strike remains one of the best damage spells in the game.
I've made my case for the state of Wizards not as an attempt to have you convinced, but as courtesy for understanding the design choices of RPG makers. I have faith that the developers understand this balance well, heck they're backed by Pathfinder's devs after all. Whether you choose to see it or not will be up to you but these roles of casters haven't changed since the dawn of RPGs. Cloud, Squall, Warrior, Ninja, Archer, Dragoon, these are the JRPG classes dealing all the damage. The Black Mage exists simply to take advantage of packs of mobs or elemental weaknesses.
So does someone want to provide a TL;DR summary of the useful bits from this thread? Because I am totally not reading it.
My thoughts in the mean time: My Wizard with Rank 1 attacks has no trouble burning down fighters and archers in +2 medium and heavy armor while they are looking the other way. Also, I don't use energetic field.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
So does someone want to provide a TL;DR summary of the useful bits from this thread? Because I am totally not reading it.
My thoughts in the mean time: My Wizard with Rank 1 attacks has no trouble burning down fighters and archers in +2 medium and heavy armor while they are looking the other way. Also, I don't use energetic field.
It started out as a "casting in melee should not present opportunity for wizards only archers" thread and has wandered off topic about 15 times.
I personally must admit to be somewhat confused as to why opportunity is such a big issue in melee given the PFO mechanics. It is not as if we are in TT where opportunity can get you slammed. How often do melee opponents in PFO spam attacks that take advantage of opportunity? It seems to me to be one of the less annoying debuffs you can get lumbered with.
Wizards seem fine in PvP and my Wizard with a +2 diminishing and +2 mage robes does fine solo up to red ogres at which point archers are clearly better. Keepers regularly hunt red and purple ogres in Wizard only parties. If he "cheats" and takes a +2 staff and +2 heavy armor he is a low level NPC genocide machine.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
This makes my Cleric-ness feel very inadequate. :DKeepers regularly hunt red and purple ogres in Wizard only parties. If he "cheats" and takes a +2 staff and +2 heavy armor he is a low level NPC genocide machine.
They are not particularly GOOD at it, a party of dedicated archers with some cleric healing would almost certainly kill purples far far quicker. It is fun though. Point was they can do it. Which for me is what matters.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
They are not particularly GOOD at it, a party of dedicated archers with some cleric healing would almost certainly kill purples far far quicker. It is fun though. Point was they can do it. Which for me is what matters.This makes my Cleric-ness feel very inadequate. :DKeepers regularly hunt red and purple ogres in Wizard only parties. If he "cheats" and takes a +2 staff and +2 heavy armor he is a low level NPC genocide machine.
You just made my point for me thanks.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
You just made my point for me thanks.They are not particularly GOOD at it, a party of dedicated archers with some cleric healing would almost certainly kill purples far far quicker. It is fun though. Point was they can do it. Which for me is what matters.This makes my Cleric-ness feel very inadequate. :DKeepers regularly hunt red and purple ogres in Wizard only parties. If he "cheats" and takes a +2 staff and +2 heavy armor he is a low level NPC genocide machine.
He also just made my point. Archers kill better than Wizards. Working as intended.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
He also just made my point. Archers kill better than Wizards. Working as intended.You just made my point for me thanks.They are not particularly GOOD at it, a party of dedicated archers with some cleric healing would almost certainly kill purples far far quicker. It is fun though. Point was they can do it. Which for me is what matters.This makes my Cleric-ness feel very inadequate. :DKeepers regularly hunt red and purple ogres in Wizard only parties. If he "cheats" and takes a +2 staff and +2 heavy armor he is a low level NPC genocide machine.
He also just made my point. *sobs holy tears*
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
He also just made my point. *sobs holy tears*He also just made my point. Archers kill better than Wizards. Working as intended.You just made my point for me thanks.They are not particularly GOOD at it, a party of dedicated archers with some cleric healing would almost certainly kill purples far far quicker. It is fun though. Point was they can do it. Which for me is what matters.This makes my Cleric-ness feel very inadequate. :DKeepers regularly hunt red and purple ogres in Wizard only parties. If he "cheats" and takes a +2 staff and +2 heavy armor he is a low level NPC genocide machine.
Dono why you are crying cleric's have the highest dmg feat's in game AND get to wear armor AND have great healing ability.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Dono why you are crying cleric's have the highest dmg feat's in game AND get to wear armor AND have great healing ability.
Really? The high damage ones, are they expendables? All I have at the moment is orisons and Cause Fear, which doesn't leave me FEELING like my damage output is particularly high. I usually get higher DPS from my mace...
Point me in the right direction, maybe someone has them for sale :D
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Dono why you are crying cleric's have the highest dmg feat's in game AND get to wear armor AND have great healing ability.Really? The high damage ones, are they expendables? All I have at the moment is orisons and Cause Fear, which doesn't leave me FEELING like my damage output is particularly high. I usually get higher DPS from my mace...
Point me in the right direction, maybe someone has them for sale :D
Yeah the expandables are what im talking about. Basically even though a cleric is a healer/melee/caster with casting alone they far out damage a arcane castor that is a dedicated caster. This is not because clerics are too powerful it's because arcane castors do not have enough damage on their high level expandables. Just being clear I don't think any other classes need to be nerfed. What is needed is a buff to high level arcane castors so we are balanced.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Speculation about high-level role balance is pointless at this stage. For one thing, you don't know how the class plays until you play it; for another, there are a lot of game systems yet to be deployed which may affect different roles' value for different kinds of game activities.
With all the polishing and new features they have on the "immediately pressing" list, I think worrying about the woes of T3 wizards who don't exist yet in trying to tackle challenges which also don't exist yet is quite premature.
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Dono why you are crying cleric's have the highest dmg feat's in game AND get to wear armor AND have great healing ability.He also just made my point. *sobs holy tears*He also just made my point. Archers kill better than Wizards. Working as intended.You just made my point for me thanks.They are not particularly GOOD at it, a party of dedicated archers with some cleric healing would almost certainly kill purples far far quicker. It is fun though. Point was they can do it. Which for me is what matters.This makes my Cleric-ness feel very inadequate. :DKeepers regularly hunt red and purple ogres in Wizard only parties. If he "cheats" and takes a +2 staff and +2 heavy armor he is a low level NPC genocide machine.
Are you referring to Basic Longbow Exploit?
