Previous Thread
Expand All
Collapse All
Ignore Author
Reply
Description: Adjusts a person's armor so that they can better recover from a failed spell casting attempt. Reduces the amount of mana lost when failing to cast a spell due to armor hindrance by 15% per rank (all fractions dropped).
Does anyone use this ARMOR specialization? I struggle to come up with a situation where I would find this preferable to learn/use over Armored Fluidity. What if instead of allowing you to recover from a failed cast more easily it made it easier to cast a spell successfully?
Armored Casting (alternative proposed):
Description: Adjusts a person's armor so as to optimize casting. Reduces the amount of mana required to cast a spell by 2% per rank of specialization (all fractions dropped).
I don't think the above is necessarily a great alternative proposal but it is something I would at least think about using over Armored Fluidity and would potentially be sought after by other classes.
What other ideas are out there for Paladin armor specializations as a replacement for Armored Casting or under what situations do you find Armored Casting useful as is?
-- Robert
>Does anyone use this ARMOR specialization?
Nope. I use fluidity. Even once I get into plate I still will only be T4 in fluidity, so I can't ever imagine spending points on armored casting since general specializations are exclusive.
Come on. Reducing the mana lost or reducing the chance to fail? Even if no mana was lost (that is, if it was 20% per rank instead of 15%), you still lose the 3 seconds of casting time. I mean, I suppose getting 75% of the mana back is pretty sweet, but reducing hindrance by 50% seems decidedly better to me.
Reducing the actual mana cost of spells is definitely more appealing, but even at T5 a reduction by 10% is questionably useful. Doesn't even affect most spells less than level 10, and I dunno, casting Divine Strike for 14 instead of 15 mana isn't anything to write home about. But I've got no alternatives to suggest really.
Maybe drop it for a damage specialization related to the alignment. Obviously that'd overlap with some of those available to warriors for some paladins, and some resist nature offered by rangers. But fluidity is pretty good, so if we get something else it would be nice for something that can be used concurrently. That's all I've got offhand.
daid (player of the temporally-challenged Harvest-Moon clan)
>Out of no where, a ki-lin gallops in.
Nope. I use fluidity. Even once I get into plate I still will only be T4 in fluidity, so I can't ever imagine spending points on armored casting since general specializations are exclusive.
Come on. Reducing the mana lost or reducing the chance to fail? Even if no mana was lost (that is, if it was 20% per rank instead of 15%), you still lose the 3 seconds of casting time. I mean, I suppose getting 75% of the mana back is pretty sweet, but reducing hindrance by 50% seems decidedly better to me.
Reducing the actual mana cost of spells is definitely more appealing, but even at T5 a reduction by 10% is questionably useful. Doesn't even affect most spells less than level 10, and I dunno, casting Divine Strike for 14 instead of 15 mana isn't anything to write home about. But I've got no alternatives to suggest really.
Maybe drop it for a damage specialization related to the alignment. Obviously that'd overlap with some of those available to warriors for some paladins, and some resist nature offered by rangers. But fluidity is pretty good, so if we get something else it would be nice for something that can be used concurrently. That's all I've got offhand.
daid (player of the temporally-challenged Harvest-Moon clan)
>Out of no where, a ki-lin gallops in.
>> Reducing the actual mana cost of spells is definitely more appealing, but even at T5 a reduction by 10% is questionably useful. Doesn't even affect most spells less than level 10...
After I posted the suggestion I started thinking it would probably need to be more like 4% per rank or some base percent plus x% per rank.
-- Robert
After I posted the suggestion I started thinking it would probably need to be more like 4% per rank or some base percent plus x% per rank.
-- Robert
Another way to make armored casting more appealing could be to also work for fumbles. Anyone who doesn't have another armor support always wants that from warriors, but less people are typically interested in what paladins can do.
Don't get me wrong, some people really like armor fluidity (or might like armored casting, I wouldn't know). But figure most squares don't want it because they don't cast spells. And many pures don't want it because they were armor with no hindrance. So it's an ability that mainly appeals to semis (or the squares that cast and the pures that wear heavier armor). Obviously these are great for paladins, rangers, and bards, but that's the main appeal.
Now, if we could give casters back mana even for fumbles, I can see that being quite appealing! A sorcerer in robes would like it just as well as a ranger in brig, unlike the present armor specializations which strictly appeal to the latter. And even paladins still have fumbles, so it could help us, too.
Of course, fumbles have nothing to do with armor, so someone might ask what's the relationship here. The relationship is, uh, making armored casting more appealing!
daid (player of the temporally-challenged Harvest-Moon clan)
>Out of no where, a ki-lin gallops in.
Don't get me wrong, some people really like armor fluidity (or might like armored casting, I wouldn't know). But figure most squares don't want it because they don't cast spells. And many pures don't want it because they were armor with no hindrance. So it's an ability that mainly appeals to semis (or the squares that cast and the pures that wear heavier armor). Obviously these are great for paladins, rangers, and bards, but that's the main appeal.
Now, if we could give casters back mana even for fumbles, I can see that being quite appealing! A sorcerer in robes would like it just as well as a ranger in brig, unlike the present armor specializations which strictly appeal to the latter. And even paladins still have fumbles, so it could help us, too.
Of course, fumbles have nothing to do with armor, so someone might ask what's the relationship here. The relationship is, uh, making armored casting more appealing!
daid (player of the temporally-challenged Harvest-Moon clan)
>Out of no where, a ki-lin gallops in.
