Previous Thread
Expand All
Collapse All
Ignore Author
Reply
Howcome new AC can't do what old AC did? Why not protect us from magical scrying? Keep us from being located? Keep other mages from percieving familiars? Keep people from joining our group via STALK?
Was held mana that much more powerful over cyclic that the new version has to be so.....less?
New AC is way better than old AC at its intended function. The anti scrying and anti percieve were removed intentionally. Old AC never did anything to stop stalking. Finally, they also fixed AC to change your eyes again, as it had been broken for some time.
IMO, reflected full power spells > anonymity.
- Starlear -
IMO, reflected full power spells > anonymity.
- Starlear -
Under the new spell design paradigm, roughly each effect that a spell can achieve has a spell slot cost associated with it. Likely, the cost of such a spell (current AC with anti-scrying added) would be prohibitive. It would make more sense at this point to request an anti-scrying spell on its own.
GENT
GENT
i believe they mentioned at one point anti-scrything might be a feat or spell.
_________________________________
An agonizing pain fills you as you feel your tongue turn to powder in your mouth! Through a haze of uncertainty and loss, you realize that something you just said was very wrong.
_________________________________
An agonizing pain fills you as you feel your tongue turn to powder in your mouth! Through a haze of uncertainty and loss, you realize that something you just said was very wrong.
>> All of the "instead" stuff you listed can also be stacked on top of AC.
I said two things.
1) You have to give up your cyclic TM slot
2) There is other ways to combat TM spells, e.g., veil of ice, sorcery spells, etc.
#1 cannot stack with AC.
And yes, clearly #2 can stack on top of AC, but that is silly. If you have AC, why would you stack a TM spell blocker?
>> As for cyclic TM, I usually find it unnecessary (and honestly I find WM cyclic TM sort of lackluster).
... What? How much PvP do you do? Anything that can be used to reduce vitality is amazing when combined with other attacks.
You can disable/dispel/targeted TM while cyclic TM spells are chipping away at your opponents life.
I said two things.
1) You have to give up your cyclic TM slot
2) There is other ways to combat TM spells, e.g., veil of ice, sorcery spells, etc.
#1 cannot stack with AC.
And yes, clearly #2 can stack on top of AC, but that is silly. If you have AC, why would you stack a TM spell blocker?
>> As for cyclic TM, I usually find it unnecessary (and honestly I find WM cyclic TM sort of lackluster).
... What? How much PvP do you do? Anything that can be used to reduce vitality is amazing when combined with other attacks.
You can disable/dispel/targeted TM while cyclic TM spells are chipping away at your opponents life.
I pvp a good amount.
I've found more effective things to do than to whittle away at vitality with fire rain. I'm not saying it's totally worthless, I'm saying that against someone else who is a caster, I find AC infinitely more valuable. FR and RoS obviously have their place, but for my playstyle and general strategy, they don't really have much of a place in my anti-caster arsenal.
I find that, with DB and AC up, disabler -> full target PW with a bottle of naphtha -> release AC + cast + spit macro -> AC back up is more effective by a large margin than anything else I've tried against other casters in an actual combat situation.
Naphtha. The way of the future! Embrace it. Love it.
- Starlear -
I've found more effective things to do than to whittle away at vitality with fire rain. I'm not saying it's totally worthless, I'm saying that against someone else who is a caster, I find AC infinitely more valuable. FR and RoS obviously have their place, but for my playstyle and general strategy, they don't really have much of a place in my anti-caster arsenal.
I find that, with DB and AC up, disabler -> full target PW with a bottle of naphtha -> release AC + cast + spit macro -> AC back up is more effective by a large margin than anything else I've tried against other casters in an actual combat situation.
Naphtha. The way of the future! Embrace it. Love it.
- Starlear -
>>Old AC never did anything to stop stalking.
Hi, here's where you're wrong. If someone had AC up, stalking them would work like this...
"You work your way towards XYZ to follow them silently..."
6 seconds or so pass.
"You have lost your mark"
You could not stalk join someone's group if they had AC up. Doesn't matter if they stayed in the room, or moved away, your stalk would always fail.
Hi, here's where you're wrong. If someone had AC up, stalking them would work like this...
"You work your way towards XYZ to follow them silently..."
6 seconds or so pass.
"You have lost your mark"
You could not stalk join someone's group if they had AC up. Doesn't matter if they stayed in the room, or moved away, your stalk would always fail.
Bug or not, I myself thought it fit the 'slightly out of phase with reality since covered in aether and unable to be located magically' theme the spell seemed to have for a while. I'd say 'maybe it covered your tracks somehow' but hilariously, I remember that even if you couldn't be located via locate or a familiar, a ranger companion could locate you, and a ranger could then track down the companion even with it up, so maybe it wasn't intended to be anti-physical-stalking, just magic stuff.
....then again, -I- remember when the spell used to drain 15% of your spirit upon casting. I even had much fun revolving around that particular aspect of the spell, until it vanished, along the same time it stopped coloring your eyes (which also left, came back, left, came back, then left again. Perhaps this stalking thing was also one of those on off on off on off features)
~T
....then again, -I- remember when the spell used to drain 15% of your spirit upon casting. I even had much fun revolving around that particular aspect of the spell, until it vanished, along the same time it stopped coloring your eyes (which also left, came back, left, came back, then left again. Perhaps this stalking thing was also one of those on off on off on off features)
~T
