Previous Thread
Previous
Expand All
Collapse All
Ignore Author
Reply
Hi everybody! (== MECHANICS == down below!)
I don't have anything silly to say today. I tried out a couple of things but, uh, they didn't work out. Anyways, today we have another seed 10 summation for you, and I have prepared myself for the onslaught of rotten tomatoes with my handy raincoat. Bring it!
== MECHANICS ==
Elemental Barrier now provides its caster a percentage chance equal to (Ranks in Elemental Lore, Earth using a seed 10 summation) to gain +10 critical padding for one attack.
~ Konacon
Decent change I guess, hard to complain about crit padding.
I really wonder at some of the spell - lore combinations. Ultimately I guess it doesn't matter since the wizard will have all of his spells, but I'd be curious to hear the rationale. Crit padding seems oddly placed on this spell rather than 520.
Also phhbhbhbhbtttttttt! to seed 10 <lobs tomato>
At 200 lore ranks you get +1.2 average crit padding, is that good? Would seed1 => 1.9 really break the bank? <shrug>
The wizard slot-machine defense keep growing, which seems a somewhat bizarre design but not inherently awful. Just undependable.
I really wonder at some of the spell - lore combinations. Ultimately I guess it doesn't matter since the wizard will have all of his spells, but I'd be curious to hear the rationale. Crit padding seems oddly placed on this spell rather than 520.
Also phhbhbhbhbtttttttt! to seed 10 <lobs tomato>
At 200 lore ranks you get +1.2 average crit padding, is that good? Would seed1 => 1.9 really break the bank? <shrug>
The wizard slot-machine defense keep growing, which seems a somewhat bizarre design but not inherently awful. Just undependable.
That's potentially helpful. Clarification needed.
1) Is it additive with crit padding on armor?
2) One attack every how often? Per round? Per critter?
3) Seed 10? Hah! You know what I'm going to say about that. Still, a 5% chance or so is better than no chance.
We need charts to show which lores give what benefits at using the various seed tables. I have totally lost track. Conspiracy theorists will say that it's all a plot to get us so confused that we won't have a clue whether wizards have gotten an overall net gain or net loss, when the changes to haste/RF/immolate roll in. Surely not!
1) Is it additive with crit padding on armor?
2) One attack every how often? Per round? Per critter?
3) Seed 10? Hah! You know what I'm going to say about that. Still, a 5% chance or so is better than no chance.
We need charts to show which lores give what benefits at using the various seed tables. I have totally lost track. Conspiracy theorists will say that it's all a plot to get us so confused that we won't have a clue whether wizards have gotten an overall net gain or net loss, when the changes to haste/RF/immolate roll in. Surely not!
Pretty please consider this not being seed 10. Would seed 4 or 5 really be so powerful? Dedicated earth lore training would mean you might have a roughly 1 in 10 chance of gaining a little bit of crit padding?
This is probably the first ELR change that actually has me slightly excited. I'm not saying earth lore should replace crit padding on gear but this is A) not that much padding anyway and B) a 5% chance or so is pretty dang small for such a huge investment of training points.
As others have said, as part of layered defenses, every extra bit is nice, although I think "Slot Machine" defense is a hilarious way of putting it.
However, I'm still a little curious about water/fire/air changes. Earth really does seem to be the lion's share of releases, and with the time left either there's a LOT left to drop all at once, or Earth will be an easy choice.
However, I'm still a little curious about water/fire/air changes. Earth really does seem to be the lion's share of releases, and with the time left either there's a LOT left to drop all at once, or Earth will be an easy choice.
>This is probably the first ELR change that actually has me slightly excited. I'm not saying earth lore should replace crit padding on gear but this is A) not that much padding anyway and B) a 5% chance or so is pretty dang small for such a huge investment of training points.
AND the two professions that benefit most from this, sorcerers and wizards, are the two professions that are stuck because of armor hindrance in soft leather armor. Whereas the two other (supposed) pures can wear rigid leather - and in the case of clerics pay less getting there. (Why is this? Because Dungeon's and Dragons and Variants always portrayed clerics as sort of warrior priests, its purely arbitrary not based in any balance equation).
So this change to 430 does take a step toward mitigating that nonsense. I agree, a little more would be nice. I'm told 10 pts of crit weighting on soft leather is barely even effective.
What could be more interesting? A nearly 100% chance of crit padding... of a variable amount. 0-10 pts on a base range, but with an open roll. With earth lore helping you reach higher endrolls. So 5% of the time you get 0 because of the open roll, but 5% of the time you have potentially more than 10 pts. Take the end roll and divide it by some seed of earth lore or something to get the actual result. Toss an adjective into the activation message to indicate the strength of the roll. Maybe the end result is you get 10 pts the same amount of time as you do under the current implementation, but the rest of the time you get 1 points, 2 points, etc, and rarely maybe you get 15 pts, 20 pts.
>> I'm told 10 pts of crit weighting on soft leather is barely even effective.
It's actually a very noticeable difference. An easy way to see this is to hunt fire mages for awhile with normal leather and then try it with HCP (+10) leather armor.
-- Robert
"All wizards are beginners; some of us have just been beginning longer!"
It's actually a very noticeable difference. An easy way to see this is to hunt fire mages for awhile with normal leather and then try it with HCP (+10) leather armor.
-- Robert
"All wizards are beginners; some of us have just been beginning longer!"
>> What could be more interesting? A nearly 100% chance of crit padding... of a variable amount. 0-10 pts on a base range, but with an open roll. With earth lore helping you reach higher endrolls. So 5% of the time you get 0 because of the open roll, but 5% of the time you have potentially more than 10 pts. Take the end roll and divide it by some seed of earth lore or something to get the actual result. Toss an adjective into the activation message to indicate the strength of the roll. Maybe the end result is you get 10 pts the same amount of time as you do under the current implementation, but the rest of the time you get 1 points, 2 points, etc, and rarely maybe you get 15 pts, 20 pts.
I was thinking of something simpler but I like this suggestion as well. I was thinking of having it provide 100% crit padding with the level of padding provided based on SEED x training instead (so your first threshold would provide 1 pt of crit padding all the time and then it could grow from there).
-- Robert
"All wizards are beginners; some of us have just been beginning longer!"
I was thinking of something simpler but I like this suggestion as well. I was thinking of having it provide 100% crit padding with the level of padding provided based on SEED x training instead (so your first threshold would provide 1 pt of crit padding all the time and then it could grow from there).
-- Robert
"All wizards are beginners; some of us have just been beginning longer!"
Right now my wizard gets 8% chance for the added crit padding from 430 (2 more ranks to hit 9%).
Does the crit padding chance trigger on maneuvers or is it strictly AS/DS attacks?
Also, I'm fairly annoyed this isn't something that went to Stone Skin. Elemental Barrier should give a chance to have a chance to flare the elemental lore you're trained in on a successful or unsuccessful attack...I mean, it is an elemental barrier, is it not?. So yeah, swap the two benefits.
-Drumpel
Does the crit padding chance trigger on maneuvers or is it strictly AS/DS attacks?
Also, I'm fairly annoyed this isn't something that went to Stone Skin. Elemental Barrier should give a chance to have a chance to flare the elemental lore you're trained in on a successful or unsuccessful attack...I mean, it is an elemental barrier, is it not?. So yeah, swap the two benefits.
-Drumpel
<<<Also, I'm fairly annoyed this isn't something that went to Stone Skin. Elemental Barrier should give a chance to have a chance to flare the elemental lore you're trained in on a successful or unsuccessful attack...I mean, it is an elemental barrier, is it not?. So yeah, swap the two benefits.>>>
That actually makes a lot of sense.
~ GtG
That actually makes a lot of sense.
~ GtG
| <<<Also, I'm fairly annoyed this isn't something that went to Stone Skin. Elemental Barrier should give a chance to have a chance to flare the elemental lore you're trained in on a successful or unsuccessful attack...I mean, it is an elemental barrier, is it not?. So yeah, swap the two benefits.>>> |
| That actually makes a lot of sense. |
| ~ GtG |
Except, it doesn't.
| Also, I'm fairly annoyed this isn't something that went to Stone Skin. Elemental Barrier should give a chance to have a chance to flare the elemental lore you're trained in on a successful or unsuccessful attack...I mean, it is an elemental barrier, is it not?. So yeah, swap the two benefits. |
| -Drumpel |
I also agree that 430 should have had a reactive flare, and 520 should have had the critical padding.
Not only does it make more sense, your skin is stone, hello. It matches up with the needs of the professions who have access to the spell. Since Warriors/Rogues can cast 430, which also makes no sense. They could at least USE the reactive flares. They're pretty much worthless for a Wizard.
Seems like a win-win for a Warrior/Rogue.
I also don't understand why each lore couldn't affect the spell. Air = Air flare, Fire = Fire flare, etc, etc. Are you afraid of giving too many benefits from lores? Because that shouldn't be a problem. Lores should provide flavor, but instead you're focusing on them providing benefits to choices, it's rather boring.
I'm with the guy that said this bonus should be swapped with 520's.
Also instead of another slot machine benefit (props to whoever coined that btw), how about something like when 430 is cast, its crit padding is guaranteed, but each time you get hit, the padding diminishes X points until it eventually wears off.
Or cast 430 and the next hit you take, the padding kicks in and then it's gone until you recast the spell.
Having reliable mean to access these benefits instead of relying on dice rolls seems like it would be way better design, and the cost is still high at 30 mana for HCP for one attack, so it's not like wizards are going to refresh it after every time they get hit.
I think most if not all of our new proc lore benefits should work like that, or at least be guaranteed to kick in for the first attack.
A 5% chance at something sounds nice on the surface. But that's only because the wording doesn't instead say "..this ability has a 95% chance to not do anything." :P
I'm not complaining, since none of this is going to affect me regardless because I plan on sticking with full fire, but we have way too many things that are completely luck based with no control over it other than casting the spell on yourself to begin with.
~ Methais
Also instead of another slot machine benefit (props to whoever coined that btw), how about something like when 430 is cast, its crit padding is guaranteed, but each time you get hit, the padding diminishes X points until it eventually wears off.
Or cast 430 and the next hit you take, the padding kicks in and then it's gone until you recast the spell.
Having reliable mean to access these benefits instead of relying on dice rolls seems like it would be way better design, and the cost is still high at 30 mana for HCP for one attack, so it's not like wizards are going to refresh it after every time they get hit.
I think most if not all of our new proc lore benefits should work like that, or at least be guaranteed to kick in for the first attack.
A 5% chance at something sounds nice on the surface. But that's only because the wording doesn't instead say "..this ability has a 95% chance to not do anything." :P
I'm not complaining, since none of this is going to affect me regardless because I plan on sticking with full fire, but we have way too many things that are completely luck based with no control over it other than casting the spell on yourself to begin with.
~ Methais
Gotta agree with Methais. Having low-proc defenses really isn't as great as you might think. Sure every once in a while it might do something useful but because you can't rely on it at all you end up having to pretend it doesn't exist in terms of planning.
For example the DS bonus from 503 would be cooler if it had a 1min duration on the DS boost. So that once it procs you actually have +20 DS and if you're in heavy fighting it would have a reasonable chance of proccing again. To me, THAT would be a benefit worth celebrating. 5% at +20DS for a strike that likely would be blocked anyway (we have pretty good DS), is pretty low value.
Same with this crit padding. Move it 520, have it proc at +10 then diminish by 1 each strike. Way more useful and assuming there's messaging on the proc, you know where you're at rather than hoping something will happen when you get nailed.
Its hard to be positively constructive when you see ELR changes such as this in comparison with 520. Almost speechless how this was considered immersive and productive design. In either scenario, the frequency and AMOUNT of padding should be tide to lore if you are going to have it on such a high seed.
There have been a lot of complaints on this spell getting the crit padding effect instead of 520...has anyone considered that they did it this way so more than just wizards could benefit from the crit padding effect. From a logical point of view, 520 is the better candidate for crit padding...but from a mechanical point of view, I would wager the padding effect is much better placed here as it can benefit sorcerers (and a rare bard/rogue) too.
| There have been a lot of complaints on this spell getting the crit padding effect instead of 520...has anyone considered that they did it this way so more than just wizards could benefit from the crit padding effect. From a logical point of view, 520 is the better candidate for crit padding...but from a mechanical point of view, I would wager the padding effect is much better placed here as it can benefit sorcerers (and a rare bard/rogue) too. |
For me, that's a reason why it SHOULD NOT have been applied to 430.
Rogues, Bards and even Sorcerers already have superior protection. Rogues and Bards have CM to assist with maneuvers, as well as 2x PF. Sorcerers can wear every spell in the game via 714.
Also, the benefit provided by a minor spell circle is far superior to the benefit added by a major spell circle. That's wrong.
It would make more sense to help Wizards only through 520.
The reactive flares would actually benefit Rogues and Bards, who can take a hit. They do absolutely nothing for a Wizard. NOTHING. Because getting hit means death.
| There have been a lot of complaints on this spell getting the crit padding effect instead of 520...has anyone considered that they did it this way so more than just wizards could benefit from the crit padding effect. From a logical point of view, 520 is the better candidate for crit padding...but from a mechanical point of view, I would wager the padding effect is much better placed here as it can benefit sorcerers (and a rare bard/rogue) too. |
This is probably true for most bards. It's not so true for Warriors or Rogues though. Who don't really need critical padding because of DFRedux and other training options.
It just adds to the list of, what were they thinking, with some of these changes/additions.
| Yea, and don't jump those rogues in that mix either. The rogue who has 430 sure does not have room for excessive lore dabbling. |
| - Guards haul off the stupid corpse. - |
Well, they have multiple reasons to train lores now. Lockpicking and now free critical padding.
Post-Cap, anything is possible.
| There have been a lot of complaints on this spell getting the crit padding effect instead of 520...has anyone considered that they did it this way so more than just wizards could benefit from the crit padding effect. From a logical point of view, 520 is the better candidate for crit padding...but from a mechanical point of view, I would wager the padding effect is much better placed here as it can benefit sorcerers (and a rare bard/rogue) too. |
But, it also benefits those classes more since most of their primary lore training does not need to be shared with other elemental choices giving them potentially better gains as compared to a wizard who has to compromise benefit by cross training in several elemental lores.
I thought the crit padding didn't go on Stone Skin because it's already associated with damage padding. Wizards end up getting both through using two circles (makes wizards need more experience to gain both benefits). Either getting a near zero chance on both my wizard and my sorcerer for the 430 proc and a never never chance for my rogue (and the 520 proc for my wizard) isn't anything to write home about in any case. I do like the 'slot machine' association as I can picture my little mage getting clocked and maybe surviving if he pulls three 'cherries'.
>>I thought the crit padding didn't go on Stone Skin because it's already associated with damage padding. Wizards end up getting both through using two circles (makes wizards need more experience to gain both benefits).
I've only lived once with Stone Skin sopping up some of the damage. I took a maneuver that knocked me down and stunned me for a couple of rounds in a room with 4 baddies. My DS was still high enough to prevent outright crit shot, but I got nicked almost to death (survived with 4 health) and a few broken, bleeding limbs and a bunch of scratches.
Generally Stone Skin for me doesn't shatter with my high MjE and EL:E ranks (63 and 124 respectively), but it doesn't keep me alive aside from the 1 time I recall. It just lets me live longer before I do die.
It does function kind of like damage padding, but those crits are what get you in. You get caught with a high enough end roll to give you a rank 2 wound, you generally absorb a decent chunk of damage, but you stand there stunned for 2+ rounds and get to witness a slow, painful death.
Why do you think some wizards get HCP on their armor....to help remove some of those crummy hits/stuns that would kill a glass cannon otherwise. Elemental Barrier should give a small chance to flare against incoming attacks. Stone Skin should offer a chance to provide crit padding to those wizards that are not equipped with crit padded armor.
-Drumpel
I've only lived once with Stone Skin sopping up some of the damage. I took a maneuver that knocked me down and stunned me for a couple of rounds in a room with 4 baddies. My DS was still high enough to prevent outright crit shot, but I got nicked almost to death (survived with 4 health) and a few broken, bleeding limbs and a bunch of scratches.
Generally Stone Skin for me doesn't shatter with my high MjE and EL:E ranks (63 and 124 respectively), but it doesn't keep me alive aside from the 1 time I recall. It just lets me live longer before I do die.
It does function kind of like damage padding, but those crits are what get you in. You get caught with a high enough end roll to give you a rank 2 wound, you generally absorb a decent chunk of damage, but you stand there stunned for 2+ rounds and get to witness a slow, painful death.
Why do you think some wizards get HCP on their armor....to help remove some of those crummy hits/stuns that would kill a glass cannon otherwise. Elemental Barrier should give a small chance to flare against incoming attacks. Stone Skin should offer a chance to provide crit padding to those wizards that are not equipped with crit padded armor.
-Drumpel
Other than making more sense thematically, it's not like it makes a mechanical difference to wizards which spell it's on.
10 points of CP is actually pretty good, it's the tiny % chance of that actually helping that prevents me from being psyched about it. Give me permanent +10CP on 520 and 5%/100ranks lore-chance on that lousy damage padding it currently provides :D
I also agree that 430 should have had a reactive flare, and 520 should have had the critical padding.
Just to be clear, you would have preferred the heavy padding effect be on a spell that drops when you need it the most, on big hits, rather than stick around until you die.
Is that what you're saying?
Viduus
Just to be clear, you would have preferred the heavy padding effect be on a spell that drops when you need it the most, on big hits, rather than stick around until you die.
Is that what you're saying?
Viduus
| For me, that's a reason why it SHOULD NOT have been applied to 430. |
| Rogues, Bards and even Sorcerers already have superior protection. Rogues and Bards have CM to assist with maneuvers, as well as 2x PF. Sorcerers can wear every spell in the game via 714. |
| Also, the benefit provided by a minor spell circle is far superior to the benefit added by a major spell circle. That's wrong. |
| It would make more sense to help Wizards only through 520. |
| The reactive flares would actually benefit Rogues and Bards, who can take a hit. They do absolutely nothing for a Wizard. NOTHING. Because getting hit means death. |
I'm sure Virilneus will fly in here and banish me from the sorcerer's club for saying this, but my main is a sorc, and I completely agree. 430 should give some sort of elemental flares (similar but not nearly as powerful as 716) and 520 should have some crit padding.
-Taakhooshi, and Me
For the Story of Taakhooshi:
http://www.gsguide.net/index.php?title=Taakhooshi
>Post-Cap, anything is possible.
As a post cap rogue with 45 spells, I can tell you that to remain viable, lores are still a long way into my future. The game is not built for post cap anyway, it is the journey to cap that the world is built around, in that world the choice to pick up these lores, if only to assist self cast picking and disarming spells is a huge trade off in other major areas of the build. Also remember that the rogue that possesses 430, isn't seeing enough DFRedux before cap to bother calculating.
| Just to be clear, you would have preferred the heavy padding effect be on a spell that drops when you need it the most, on big hits, rather than stick around until you die. |
| Is that what you're saying? |
| Viduus |
Ooooooh Viduus is doing some schooling on us stupid wizards. But for reals, 520 sucks in all ways. I had forgotten it even does that because it's effect comes up so infrequently.
But you're completely correct, keep the worst lore benefit on the worst spell so that if it falls from cracking we lose the least important lore-buff.
<<<Except, it doesn't.>>>
<<<I also agree>>>
How droll. You just quoted a paragraph that I said, "makes a lot of sense," stating, "Except, it doesn't." Then you quoted the exact same paragraph...in the same post...stating how you agree with it, and how it makes perfect sense.
Apparently I'm not allowed to say what I actually think about that nonsense, so...
~ GtG
<<<I also agree>>>
How droll. You just quoted a paragraph that I said, "makes a lot of sense," stating, "Except, it doesn't." Then you quoted the exact same paragraph...in the same post...stating how you agree with it, and how it makes perfect sense.
Apparently I'm not allowed to say what I actually think about that nonsense, so...
~ GtG
| Just to be clear, you would have preferred the heavy padding effect be on a spell that drops when you need it the most, on big hits, rather than stick around until you die. |
| Is that what you're saying? |
| Viduus |
I would imagine most would prefer having the effect on 520 primarily because most wizards don't die to plinking and if 520 is dropping, more than likely you are far beyond the benefit of need. In other words, you are more than likely dead anyway where as the crit padding would be far superior to the damage padding alone due to the reduction in likelihood of stun duration and instagimp deaths that MAs are so well known for. And this completely ignores the immersion context of the spell where it seems more likely that if your skin was covered or hardened to that of stone, you more than likely would not only take reduced damage but also the severity of each blow would be reduced whereas a elemental barrier swirling between you and the mob would more than likely negatively impact physical contact of the mob as it tries to attack you (aka, the reactive flare). And the final point, from a wizard genre perspective, what wizard in there right mind would create a spell like 520 and think it was in good design? Pretty sure if wizards represent the most intelligent and well-studied talent in the lands, they probably would have figured out a way to confer some benefit which reduces the likelihood of death or doesn't require them getting smacked in the first place oO?.
| Just to be clear, you would have preferred the heavy padding effect be on a spell that drops when you need it the most, on big hits, rather than stick around until you die. |
| Is that what you're saying? |
| Viduus |
Usually "a big hit" isn't hard enough to shatter my stone skin, but they are hard enough to break a limb or a deep gash in the head/neck/ab/back area - along with a 2+ round stun and this is what gets me most of the time; stuck in a long stun.
IF by chance the stone skin was able to provide some crit protection on a hit like that to reduce the severity of the end result would be very welcomed and provide a much greater chance of survival for my wizard.
-Drumpel
>> Just to be clear, you would have preferred the heavy padding effect be on a spell that drops when you need it the most, on big hits, rather than stick around until you die.
Is that what you're saying? ~Viduus
Thematioally I agree they should be swapped. Practically speaking, I don't care other than I prefer things have a logical theme vs. feeling like the properties were just sort of tacked on in a hodge-podge manner (not saying that's how it was done, just how it feels in this case from the perspective of someone who doesn't have to balance everything as part of the design effort). I think my opinion would be weighted more on how many critters have 520 up vs. 430 since I view the reactive flares as more of a detriment than a positive (and I'll cover that in my next post in the appropriate thread).
-- Robert
The ELR will never end! VIVE LA ELR! ~ Konacon
Is that what you're saying? ~Viduus
Thematioally I agree they should be swapped. Practically speaking, I don't care other than I prefer things have a logical theme vs. feeling like the properties were just sort of tacked on in a hodge-podge manner (not saying that's how it was done, just how it feels in this case from the perspective of someone who doesn't have to balance everything as part of the design effort). I think my opinion would be weighted more on how many critters have 520 up vs. 430 since I view the reactive flares as more of a detriment than a positive (and I'll cover that in my next post in the appropriate thread).
-- Robert
The ELR will never end! VIVE LA ELR! ~ Konacon
>>I would imagine most would prefer having the effect on 520 primarily because most wizards don't die to plinking and if 520 is dropping, more than likely you are far beyond the benefit of need. In other words, you are more than likely dead anyway where as the crit padding would be far superior to the damage padding alone due to the reduction in likelihood of stun duration and instagimp deaths that MAs are so well known for. And this completely ignores the immersion context of the spell where it seems more likely that if your skin was covered or hardened to that of stone, you more than likely would not only take reduced damage but also the severity of each blow would be reduced whereas a elemental barrier swirling between you and the mob would more than likely negatively impact physical contact of the mob as it tries to attack you (aka, the reactive flare).
You're making the assumption that had the lore benefit been tied directly to 520 that either 520 would have functioned in some manner that it doesn't currently, or that the lore benefit would have been different than it currently is. Given that 520 wasn't redesigned, you can't make that assumption and have to work with what you know and how things currently are.
>>And the final point, from a wizard genre perspective, what wizard in there right mind would create a spell like 520 and think it was in good design?
I'm sure no engineers today look at the top end of materials that we can produce and think they're the best design that they can be. Today's engineers designs are constrained by forces outside of their control. I'd assume wizards in the game are under similar constraints.
>>Pretty sure if wizards represent the most intelligent and well-studied talent in the lands, they probably would have figured out a way to confer some benefit which reduces the likelihood of death or doesn't require them getting smacked in the first place oO?.
Maybe 520 gets redesigned at some point and the discussion changes, or maybe it stays the same. If it got redesigned then it would potentially be rewritten from ground up, including lore benefit so "maybe" gets murky.
Keeping the discussion grounded in reality as things currently are and are currently designed, this all reduces to a very simple question. Would you rather have padding on a spell that sticks around until death, or one that (by current design) falls.
Viduus
You're making the assumption that had the lore benefit been tied directly to 520 that either 520 would have functioned in some manner that it doesn't currently, or that the lore benefit would have been different than it currently is. Given that 520 wasn't redesigned, you can't make that assumption and have to work with what you know and how things currently are.
>>And the final point, from a wizard genre perspective, what wizard in there right mind would create a spell like 520 and think it was in good design?
I'm sure no engineers today look at the top end of materials that we can produce and think they're the best design that they can be. Today's engineers designs are constrained by forces outside of their control. I'd assume wizards in the game are under similar constraints.
>>Pretty sure if wizards represent the most intelligent and well-studied talent in the lands, they probably would have figured out a way to confer some benefit which reduces the likelihood of death or doesn't require them getting smacked in the first place oO?.
Maybe 520 gets redesigned at some point and the discussion changes, or maybe it stays the same. If it got redesigned then it would potentially be rewritten from ground up, including lore benefit so "maybe" gets murky.
Keeping the discussion grounded in reality as things currently are and are currently designed, this all reduces to a very simple question. Would you rather have padding on a spell that sticks around until death, or one that (by current design) falls.
Viduus
"We need charts to show which lores give what benefits at using the various seed tables." -- Throgg
DONE!
And so we return to the roots of the old Lore Benefits chart... :)
SORCERER
DONE!
And so we return to the roots of the old Lore Benefits chart... :)
SORCERER
| Demon | Necro | Spell | Benefit |
| | | | |
| 2 | 0706 | Mind Jolt, spillover to new target, 2% per step, 1 step [02% chance total] | |
| 5 | 0706 | Mind Jolt, spillover to new target, 2% per step, +1 step [04% chance total] | |
| 9 | 0706 | Mind Jolt, spillover to new target, 2% per step, +1 step [06% chance total] | |
| 14 | 0706 | Mind Jolt, spillover to new target, 2% per step, +1 step [08% chance total] | |
| 20 | 0706 | Mind Jolt, spillover to new target, 2% per step, +1 step [10% chance total] | |
| 27 | 0706 | Mind Jolt, spillover to new target, 2% per step, +1 step [12% chance total] | |
| 35 | 0706 | Mind Jolt, spillover to new target, 2% per step, +1 step [14% chance total] | |
| 44 | 0706 | Mind Jolt, spillover to new target, 2% per step, +1 step [16% chance total] | |
| 54 | 0706 | Mind Jolt, spillover to new target, 2% per step, +1 step [18% chance total] | |
| 65 | 0706 | Mind Jolt, spillover to new target, 2% per step, +1 step [20% chance total] | |
| 77 | 0706 | Mind Jolt, spillover to new target, 2% per step, +1 step [22% chance total] | |
| 90 | 0706 | Mind Jolt, spillover to new target, 2% per step, +1 step [24% chance total] | |
| 104 | 0706 | Mind Jolt, spillover to new target, 2% per step, +1 step [26% chance total] | |
| 119 | 0706 | Mind Jolt, spillover to new target, 2% per step, +1 step [28% chance total] | |
| 135 | 0706 | Mind Jolt, spillover to new target, 2% per step, +1 step [30% chance total] | |
| 152 | 0706 | Mind Jolt, spillover to new target, 2% per step, +1 step [32% chance total] | |
| 170 | 0706 | Mind Jolt, spillover to new target, 2% per step, +1 step [34% chance total] | |
| 189 | 0706 | Mind Jolt, spillover to new target, 2% per step, +1 step [36% chance total] | |
| 209 | 0706 | Mind Jolt, spillover to new target, 2% per step, +1 step [38% chance total] | |
| 230 | 0706 | Mind Jolt, spillover to new target, 2% per step, +1 step [40% chance total] | |
| 252 | 0706 | Mind Jolt, spillover to new target, 2% per step, +1 step [42% chance total] | |
| 275 | 0706 | Mind Jolt, spillover to new target, 2% per step, +1 step [44% chance total] | |
| 299 | 0706 | Mind Jolt, spillover to new target, 2% per step, +1 step [46% chance total] | |
| 2 | 0709 | Grasp of the Grave, subsequent knockdown, 2% per step, 1 step [02% chance total] | |
| 5 | 0709 | Grasp of the Grave, subsequent knockdown, 2% per step, +1 step [04% chance total] | |
| 6 | 0705 | Disintegrate, weapon/shield/armor degradation, 1% | |
| 9 | 0709 | Grasp of the Grave, subsequent knockdown, 2% per step, +1 step [06% chance total] | |
| 9 | 0716 | Pestilence, +1 charge (added to 5 base) [06 charges total] | |
| 9 | 0716 | Pestilence, +2% chance reactive attack [02% chance total] | |
| 10 | 0730 | Animate Dead, +1 MAL | |
| 13 | 0705 | Disintegrate, weapon/shield/armor degradation, +1% [02% chance total] | |
| 14 | 0709 | Grasp of the Grave, subsequent knockdown, 2% per step, +1 step [08% chance total] | |
| 19 | 0716 | Pestilence, +2% chance reactive attack [04% chance total] | |
| 19 | 0716 | Pestilence, +1 charge [07 charges total] | |
| 20 | 0705 | Disintegrate, bolt | |
| 20 | 0709 | Grasp of the Grave, subsequent knockdown, 2% per step, +1 step [10% chance total] | |
| 20 | 0730 | Animate Dead, +1 MAL [+02 total] | |
| 21 | 0705 | Disintegrate, weapon/shield/armor degradation, +1% [03% chance total] | |
| 27 | 0709 | Grasp of the Grave, subsequent knockdown, 2% per step, +1 step [12% chance total] | |
| 30 | 0705 | Disintegrate, weapon/shield/armor degradation, +1% [04% chance total] | |
| 30 | 0716 | Pestilence, +1 charge [08 charges total] | |
| 30 | 0716 | Pestilence, +2% chance reactive attack [06% chance total] | |
| 30 | 0730 | Animate Dead, +1 MAL [+03 total] | |
| 35 | 0709 | Grasp of the Grave, subsequent knockdown, 2% per step, +1 step [14% chance total] | |
| 40 | 0705 | Disintegrate, weapon/shield/armor degradation, +1% [05% chance total] | |
| 40 | 0730 | Animate Dead, +1 MAL [+04 total] | |
| 42 | 0716 | Pestilence, +2% chance reactive attack [08% chance total] | |
| 42 | 0716 | Pestilence, +1 charge [09 charges total] | |
| 44 | 0709 | Grasp of the Grave, subsequent knockdown, 2% per step, +1 step [16% chance total] | |
| 50 | 0730 | Animate Dead, +1 MAL [+05 total] | |
| 51 | 0705 | Disintegrate, weapon/shield/armor degradation, +1% [06% chance total] | |
| 54 | 0709 | Grasp of the Grave, subsequent knockdown, 2% per step, +1 step [18% chance total] | |
| 55 | 0716 | Pestilence, +1 charge [10 charges total] | |
| 55 | 0716 | Pestilence, +2% chance reactive attack [10% chance total] | |
| 60 | 0730 | Animate Dead, +1 MAL [+06 total] | |
| 63 | 0705 | Disintegrate, weapon/shield/armor degradation, +1% [07% chance total] | |
| 65 | 0709 | Grasp of the Grave, subsequent knockdown, 2% per step, +1 step [20% chance total] | |
| 69 | 0716 | Pestilence, +1 charge [11 charges total] | |
| 69 | 0716 | Pestilence, +2% chance reactive attack [12% chance total] | |
| 70 | 0730 | Animate Dead, +1 MAL [+07 total] | |
| 76 | 0705 | Disintegrate, weapon/shield/armor degradation, +1% [08% chance total] | |
| 77 | 0709 | Grasp of the Grave, subsequent knockdown, 2% per step, +1 step [22% chance total] | |
| 80 | 0730 | Animate Dead, +1 MAL [+08 total] | |
| 84 | 0716 | Pestilence, +2% chance reactive attack [14% chance total] | |
| 84 | 0716 | Pestilence, +1 charge [12 charges total] | |
| 90 | 0705 | Disintegrate, weapon/shield/armor degradation, +1% [09% chance total] | |
| 90 | 0709 | Grasp of the Grave, subsequent knockdown, 2% per step, +1 step [24% chance total] | |
| 90 | 0730 | Animate Dead, +1 MAL [+09 total] | |
| 100 | 0716 | Pestilence, +2% chance reactive attack [16% chance total] | |
| 100 | 0716 | Pestilence, +1 charge [13 charges total] | |
| 100 | 0730 | Animate Dead, +1 MAL [+10 total] | |
| 104 | 0709 | Grasp of the Grave, subsequent knockdown, 2% per step, +1 step [26% chance total] | |
| 105 | 0705 | Disintegrate, weapon/shield/armor degradation, +1% [10% chance total] | |
| 110 | 0730 | Animate Dead, +1 MAL [+11 total] | |
| 117 | 0716 | Pestilence, +1 charge [14 charges total] | |
| 117 | 0716 | Pestilence, +2% chance reactive attack [18% chance total] | |
| 119 | 0709 | Grasp of the Grave, subsequent knockdown, 2% per step, +1 step [28% chance total] | |
| 120 | 0730 | Animate Dead, +1 MAL [+12 total] | |
| 121 | 0705 | Disintegrate, weapon/shield/armor degradation, +1% [11% chance total] | |
| 130 | 0730 | Animate Dead, +1 MAL [+13 total] | |
| 135 | 0709 | Grasp of the Grave, subsequent knockdown, 2% per step, +1 step [30% chance total] | |
| 135 | 0716 | Pestilence, +1 charge [15 charges total] | |
| 135 | 0716 | Pestilence, +2% chance reactive attack [20% chance total] | |
| 138 | 0705 | Disintegrate, weapon/shield/armor degradation, +1% [12% chance total] | |
| 140 | 0730 | Animate Dead, +1 MAL [+14 total] | |
| 150 | 0730 | Animate Dead, +1 MAL [+15 total] | |
| 152 | 0709 | Grasp of the Grave, subsequent knockdown, 2% per step, +1 step [32% chance total] | |
| 154 | 0716 | Pestilence, +2% chance reactive attack [22% chance total] | |
| 154 | 0716 | Pestilence, +1 charge [16 charges total] | |
| 156 | 0705 | Disintegrate, weapon/shield/armor degradation, +1% [13% chance total] | |
| 160 | 0730 | Animate Dead, +1 MAL [+16 total] | |
| 170 | 0709 | Grasp of the Grave, subsequent knockdown, 2% per step, +1 step [34% chance total] | |
| 170 | 0730 | Animate Dead, +1 MAL [+17 total] | |
| 174 | 0716 | Pestilence, +1 charge [17 charges total] | |
| 174 | 0716 | Pestilence, +2% chance reactive attack [24% chance total] | |
| 175 | 0705 | Disintegrate, weapon/shield/armor degradation, +1% [14% chance total] | |
| 180 | 0730 | Animate Dead, +1 MAL [+18 total] | |
| 189 | 0709 | Grasp of the Grave, subsequent knockdown, 2% per step, +1 step [36% chance total] | |
| 190 | 0730 | Animate Dead, +1 MAL [+19 total] | |
| 195 | 0705 | Disintegrate, weapon/shield/armor degradation, +1% [15% chance total] | |
| 195 | 0716 | Pestilence, +2% chance reactive attack [26% chance total] | |
| 195 | 0716 | Pestilence, +1 charge [18 charges total] | |
| 200 | 0730 | Animate Dead, +1 MAL [+20 total] | |
| 209 | 0709 | Grasp of the Grave, subsequent knockdown, 2% per step, +1 step [38% chance total] | |
| 210 | 0730 | Animate Dead, +1 MAL [+21 total] | |
| 216 | 0705 | Disintegrate, weapon/shield/armor degradation, +1% [16% chance total] | |
| 217 | 0716 | Pestilence, +1 charge [19 charges total] | |
| 217 | 0716 | Pestilence, +2% chance reactive attack [28% chance total] | |
| 220 | 0730 | Animate Dead, +1 MAL [+22 total] | |
| 230 | 0709 | Grasp of the Grave, subsequent knockdown, 2% per step, +1 step [40% chance total] | |
| 230 | 0730 | Animate Dead, +1 MAL [+23 total] | |
| 238 | 0705 | Disintegrate, weapon/shield/armor degradation, +1% [17% chance total] | |
| 240 | 0716 | Pestilence, +2% chance reactive attack [30% chance total] | |
| 240 | 0716 | Pestilence, +1 charge [20 charges total] | |
| 240 | 0730 | Animate Dead, +1 MAL [+24 total] | |
| 250 | 0730 | Animate Dead, +1 MAL [+25 total] | |
| 252 | 0709 | Grasp of the Grave, subsequent knockdown, 2% per step, +1 step [42% chance total] | |
| 261 | 0705 | Disintegrate, weapon/shield/armor degradation, +1% [18% chance total] | |
| 264 | 0716 | Pestilence, +2% chance reactive attack [32% chance total] | |
| 264 | 0716 | Pestilence, +1 charge [21 charges total] | |
| 275 | 0709 | Grasp of the Grave, subsequent knockdown, 2% per step, +1 step [44% chance total] | |
| 285 | 0705 | Disintegrate, weapon/shield/armor degradation, +1% [19% chance total] | |
| 289 | 0716 | Pestilence, +1 charge [22 charges total] | |
| 289 | 0716 | Pestilence, +2% chance reactive attack [34% chance total] | |
| 299 | 0709 | Grasp of the Grave, subsequent knockdown, 2% per step, +1 step [46% chance total] |
