Previous Thread
Expand All
Collapse All
Ignore Author
Reply
I always thought the spell Harm Evil was a Cleric's BEST spell for killing undead. Sort of our "premium" spell.
Now, quite possibly I'm wrong, and all comments are welcome....but if this is our premium spell, then:
1) Why do I miss more often with this spell than any other?
2) Why do I backfire more often? Regardless of how high or low I'm casting at, I backfire A LOT with this spell.
3) Why does it do less damage compared to other spells? (FoU, Horn, FF)
What are you testing on? Are you writing out numbers (times missed, etc.) or is this based on your perceptions?
I have heard that Horn is our most accurate spell. I don't know which is least accurate. I've never run numbers to confirm that on Horn, though.
HE is a Death From Above spell--it ignores shield and armor--so may have some tradeoffs depending on what you fight. I also don't remember the damage components (and elanthipedia doesn't specify).
Also, regarding backfires, I haven't noticed anything of the sort. If you're casting at the cap you've seen in DISCERN, try casting 1-2 mana lower. That cap can be fiddly. I always cast a little below it to reduce the number of backfires, no matter the spell.
I have heard that Horn is our most accurate spell. I don't know which is least accurate. I've never run numbers to confirm that on Horn, though.
HE is a Death From Above spell--it ignores shield and armor--so may have some tradeoffs depending on what you fight. I also don't remember the damage components (and elanthipedia doesn't specify).
Also, regarding backfires, I haven't noticed anything of the sort. If you're casting at the cap you've seen in DISCERN, try casting 1-2 mana lower. That cap can be fiddly. I always cast a little below it to reduce the number of backfires, no matter the spell.
1) Why do I miss more often with this spell than any other?
2) Why do I backfire more often? Regardless of how high or low I'm casting at, I backfire A LOT with this spell.
3) Why does it do less damage compared to other spells? (FoU, Horn, FF)
Replies:
1) HE is a DFA spell. The tradeoff for ignoring shield/armor is that your target gets a bit of a boost to evasion so depending on what you are casting upon, you may miss more frequently. Heavily shielded/armored targets are going to be somewhat easier to hit with HE versus a creature that is already all evasion.
2) No ideas here, try using Discern to get a approximate gauge of mana to use?
3) This seems more like a perception than an actual thing. When using HE, I've not noticed in discrepancy in its ability to do hurt. (According to Discern, it's damage type is set to Fire/Electric)
Thank you for all the input, it's appreciated.
I've been hunting the Death Spirits under the Moon Mage Guild. With 250 Target, one might hope that:
1) I would rarely miss.
2) I would kill them quickly.
3) I would rarely backfire. (Currently, discern tells me 43 streams) I have tried casting at 40 and below. I have been experimenting with this for several weeks. Always completely healed, no enc, etc. etc. I have also weakened them with malediction.
I have not neglected my training in wisdom/intel/discipline, etc.
I think I just feel a bit sad that this spell doesn't work better than other spells against the undead.
Again, thanks for the input. I guess I was just wondering if other Clerics were having any issues with this spell.
I've been hunting the Death Spirits under the Moon Mage Guild. With 250 Target, one might hope that:
1) I would rarely miss.
2) I would kill them quickly.
3) I would rarely backfire. (Currently, discern tells me 43 streams) I have tried casting at 40 and below. I have been experimenting with this for several weeks. Always completely healed, no enc, etc. etc. I have also weakened them with malediction.
I have not neglected my training in wisdom/intel/discipline, etc.
I think I just feel a bit sad that this spell doesn't work better than other spells against the undead.
Again, thanks for the input. I guess I was just wondering if other Clerics were having any issues with this spell.
>> I think I just feel a bit sad that this spell doesn't work better than other spells against the undead.
When they made HE DFA and shield/armor, it has the indirect impact of working poorly against undead who don't have armor/shield. If a creature doesn't armor/shield they likely have higher evasion which is bonused from DFA.
Which version are you fighting? The ones in crossing have no shield/armor and the ones in the Monastery/Ratha have armor/shield. I would expect the HE to perform more favorably towards the armored opponents.
However, I read a post in the recently where Raesh mentioned creatures above 100 circle start getting "natural shields" and "natural armor" even if you can't see it. So I would expect HE to get better as the creatures get harder. Since they would probably rely less on evasion and more on the natural shield/armor which is bypassed by HE.
I'd also love to see more of an emphasis on holy damage type against undead but not sure how if that really exists. I know DR will increase damage from "blessed" weapons, but not sure if any spells are setup for this.
At this time all TM spells are equally accurate.
There's also no setting to make a spell "backfire more". Spells have a difficulty setting, and that's that. Any other spell of equal difficulty cast under the same circumstances will backfire the same amount.
The comments about DFA being less useful if they don't have a shield are true.
All* creatures have armor. If they don't have real armor, they have natural armor. As a rule of thumb around 100th level we start giving all creatures shields - if they aren't humanoid they get a natural shield. This is nothing new and you can tell when a creature has one of these because they'll block with it. 'dillos are a classic example of a creature like this, but so are lava drakes a bunch more.
This is part of why head-splitters are so popular. They're about 100th level, undead and lack a shield and are wearing tissue paper armor. Frankly, they're broken and it's been on my list for awhile to help them out.
-Raesh
*There might be some that aren't set up correctly. There's a lot of creatures, I certainly didn't audit them all.
"The trouble with atheism, is that it offers a limited range of curses.” - Two Serpents Rise
There's also no setting to make a spell "backfire more". Spells have a difficulty setting, and that's that. Any other spell of equal difficulty cast under the same circumstances will backfire the same amount.
The comments about DFA being less useful if they don't have a shield are true.
All* creatures have armor. If they don't have real armor, they have natural armor. As a rule of thumb around 100th level we start giving all creatures shields - if they aren't humanoid they get a natural shield. This is nothing new and you can tell when a creature has one of these because they'll block with it. 'dillos are a classic example of a creature like this, but so are lava drakes a bunch more.
This is part of why head-splitters are so popular. They're about 100th level, undead and lack a shield and are wearing tissue paper armor. Frankly, they're broken and it's been on my list for awhile to help them out.
-Raesh
*There might be some that aren't set up correctly. There's a lot of creatures, I certainly didn't audit them all.
"The trouble with atheism, is that it offers a limited range of curses.” - Two Serpents Rise
>> At this time all TM spells are equally accurate.
Even DFA spells?
What is the tradeoff of DFA currently meant to be in that case, out of curiosity? There is a perception that they're not as good as other TM spells, and I thought this was due to lowered accuracy, so I guess I'm curious what the present setup is.
Thayet
Twitter: @thayelf
Tumblr: thayette.tumblr.com
Even DFA spells?
What is the tradeoff of DFA currently meant to be in that case, out of curiosity? There is a perception that they're not as good as other TM spells, and I thought this was due to lowered accuracy, so I guess I'm curious what the present setup is.
Thayet
Twitter: @thayelf
Tumblr: thayette.tumblr.com
>What is the tradeoff of DFA currently meant to be in that case, out of curiosity? There is a perception that they're not as good as other TM spells, and I thought this was due to lowered accuracy, so I guess I'm curious what the present setup is.
Strictly speaking, the target getting an Evasion bonus is not the same thing as the spell being less accurate?
>Forgive my snark, but welcome to the life of a warrior mage.
Strictly speaking, the target getting an Evasion bonus is not the same thing as the spell being less accurate?
>Forgive my snark, but welcome to the life of a warrior mage.
Sorry - I didn't mean DFA = Non-DFA.
I meant "Random non-DFA spell #1" = "Random non-DFA spell #2" and "Random DFA spell #1" = "Random DFA spell #2".
I'd actually have to go code diving to remind myself it there's an accuracy change between DFA and non-DFA... I don't believe there is, but there is certainly the evasion bonus which is kinda the same thing.
-Raesh
"The trouble with atheism, is that it offers a limited range of curses.” - Two Serpents Rise
I meant "Random non-DFA spell #1" = "Random non-DFA spell #2" and "Random DFA spell #1" = "Random DFA spell #2".
I'd actually have to go code diving to remind myself it there's an accuracy change between DFA and non-DFA... I don't believe there is, but there is certainly the evasion bonus which is kinda the same thing.
-Raesh
"The trouble with atheism, is that it offers a limited range of curses.” - Two Serpents Rise
>As a rule of thumb around 100th level we start giving all creatures shields
Given that we don't know how a critters skills break down, does that mean that using DFA against critters with shields is a good idea, or a bad one?
My understanding of DFA was that if evasion was >120% the targets shield skill, DFA is not good. How does that work with critters?
