PDA

View Full Version : Please fix burning blood!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



Shade
09-07-2007, 11:16 PM
Really sick of dying to a fortitude save spell on my barbarian, who has a +40 fotitude save.

(currently has no save, but description lists it as a fortitude save)

Reported this in game long ago. Please fix this.

Soul-Shaker
09-07-2007, 11:49 PM
Fort save is just to skip first tick of the dot dmg from what I remember, but looks like they messed up the tool tip for this along several patchs because now like you say it does say a successful save negates. Older text use to say successful save negates initial dmg or something to that effect. I dont think they messed up the save, as 1d8 acid and fire is total **** if its a save spell, just the text for it was lost along the way.

Dingo123
09-08-2007, 12:10 AM
It does 2d8 damage per level. That's more than disintegrate. Yes, it's DoT and that blows... but it's also something that can be cast on a red name for substantial damage over time if they lack immunities.

Shade
09-08-2007, 01:38 AM
Fort save is just to skip first tick of the dot dmg from what I remember, but looks like they messed up the tool tip for this along several patchs because now like you say it does say a successful save negates. Older text use to say successful save negates initial dmg or something to that effect. I dont think they messed up the save, as 1d8 acid and fire is total **** if its a save spell, just the text for it was lost along the way.

Nope. There was never a save. The description was bugged, they dont mess up desriptions later, they fix them as was noted in the release notes. Having it work as you described would make no sense at all, it hits like 20+ times, stoping 1 hit is useless.

And you get no save roll at all, not even vs the first hit.

And 1d8 is not 1d8 in ddo... You know that. Burning blood does over a 100 damage per tic with max enhance/item/feat, then it hits a ton of times as it lasts like 44 seconds, then with the maximum resist at 30, makes it pretty ******** for PvP as a caster can just hit anyone and then run away until there dead, with no save, no spell resist, no dodging, nothing possible to avoid it.

Chelsa
09-08-2007, 01:52 AM
Really sick of dying to a fortitude save spell on my barbarian, who has a +40 fotitude save.

(currently has no save, but description lists it as a fortitude save)

Reported this in game long ago. Please fix this.

It a very easy spell to counter in quests. Normal fire and acid resists potions negate damage.

Shade
09-08-2007, 02:30 AM
It a very easy spell to counter in quests. Normal fire and acid resists potions negate damage.

... yea thats not the point. So most mobs are too noob to use max/emp.. Players are a bit smarter.

BUpcott
09-08-2007, 02:38 AM
... yea thats not the point. So most mobs are too noob to use max/emp.. Players are a bit smarter.

So whats the problem than did you get owned in PvP? just resist yourself in a quest and your are fine (heck i thi8nk my 10 point resist from the seal of earth covers the acid part of burning blood.

EDIT: didnt really read anything just got home from bar forgive if i a,m off topic

Elthbert
09-08-2007, 11:49 AM
Nope. There was never a save. The description was bugged, they dont mess up desriptions later, they fix them as was noted in the release notes. Having it work as you described would make no sense at all, it hits like 20+ times, stoping 1 hit is useless.

And you get no save roll at all, not even vs the first hit.

And 1d8 is not 1d8 in ddo... You know that. Burning blood does over a 100 damage per tic with max enhance/item/feat, then it hits a ton of times as it lasts like 44 seconds, then with the maximum resist at 30, makes it pretty ******** for PvP as a caster can just hit anyone and then run away until there dead, with no save, no spell resist, no dodging, nothing possible to avoid it.

The Game is not, nor should be balanced witha ny regards torwards PvP. In Quest it is not that big a deal and that is ALL that matters..

Aspenor
09-08-2007, 11:56 AM
Theres a save you only avoid the first round of damage though, sorta pointless.

ArkoHighStar
09-08-2007, 12:47 PM
if you want to avoid in pvp just get house p resists they last a 1/2 hour

Soul-Shaker
09-08-2007, 02:32 PM
Nope. There was never a save. The description was bugged, they dont mess up desriptions later, they fix them as was noted in the release notes. Having it work as you described would make no sense at all, it hits like 20+ times, stoping 1 hit is useless.

And you get no save roll at all, not even vs the first hit.

And 1d8 is not 1d8 in ddo... You know that. Burning blood does over a 100 damage per tic with max enhance/item/feat, then it hits a ton of times as it lasts like 44 seconds, then with the maximum resist at 30, makes it pretty ******** for PvP as a caster can just hit anyone and then run away until there dead, with no save, no spell resist, no dodging, nothing possible to avoid it.

There was always a save just to avoid initial tick. I dont recall them ever changing Burning Blood to avoid all with a save in any WDA, if so plz quote it. As for a max, empower, extended, enhancements, and items with burning blood can only do over 30 dmg per tick of 1 element on a crit. And using that much sp points is a total waste for slightly over a 200 pts actually no crit. With FW being the same level which actually seems to last longer and can do like well over 2000 dmg under the same buffs, its a AoE, and no has no save so its a total waste to use Burning Blood if there was a save to avoid all.

Soul-Shaker
09-08-2007, 03:50 PM
The only thing I could find to this effect was "Module 4 Reaver's Bane: Final Release Notes"
Fixed Burning Blood description to indicate that a save only occurs on application, not each round, as it previously stated.


This was just to clarify that each tick didnt have a save and just the first round did. Other then that I see no change to the spell. Sounds like they must have made a description change between then and now as well because it was always a save to avoid just the first round of dmg.

Shade
09-09-2007, 01:23 AM
Burning Blood - In game description:
You taint a living creatures blood with a hot corrosive infusion, dealing both 1d8 points of acid and 1d8 points of fire per round per caster level. A successful Fortitude save negates this effect.

That reads very clearly to me, save and it doesn't work. Pretty cut and dry, no weird incorrect description - they fixed the description as listed in the release notes.

All I'm asking is for the spell to be fixed so it works per the description.
Just doesn't makes sense to me to try to argue against a bug fix.

You can debate the power of the spell or weather or not XXX is intended or whatever, but please make your own thread to do so. Constantly posting about a spell you haven't tested isn't really helpful.

Soul id imagine your a fire spec sorc like most.. So yea maybe burning blood doesn't do great damage for you, because well its an acid and fire spell, so you need lightning/acid spec. Anyways I don't make up my numbers they been tested many times. Yea its got a big range where it might do only 1dmg, but it can also do over 100 dmg non crit, ive had it happen many times. Its 50ish from the fire and 50ish from the acid. A resist 30 would drop thats to 20 per type, for 40 per tic, but that still freakin hurts as it hits every 2 seconds for up to 44 seconds. Thats 880 non crit dmg for 1 spell against someone who has the maximum possible resist versus it. If you think thats really not a good spell thats your opinion.

Crits? It can freakin do over 250 dmg per tic on crit! 125 + 125 fire/acid! thats 5500 dmg on a max crit. Use that against a fire weak boss? Its not that bad a spell as you think. (then consider the fact you can crit 18% of the time and the spells cooldown is 2.3 seconds - can basicly guarentee a critical in like less then 15 seconds.

Now yea those are max dmg and it does have a random range it seems but even so, a bit of luck and its dealing some ******** damage.
Regardless, like I said this thread is not to discuss the merits or balance of the spell, but merely to indicate a bug and request it fixed.

Again, for the third time. IT HAS NO SAVE. Not even on the initial hit. Nothing is shown in the combat log, there are no rolls, and scrolls land on CR 24 mobs 100% of the time imediately with no initial delay.

So please, if you want to continue to post and say theres a save, go test it first.

bandyman1
09-09-2007, 01:52 AM
I think someone is peeved they got PwNed :D .

Soul-Shaker
09-09-2007, 02:43 AM
Burning Blood - In game description:
You taint a living creatures blood with a hot corrosive infusion, dealing both 1d8 points of acid and 1d8 points of fire per round per caster level. A successful Fortitude save negates this effect.

That reads very clearly to me, save and it doesn't work. Pretty cut and dry, no weird incorrect description - they fixed the description as listed in the release notes.

All I'm asking is for the spell to be fixed so it works per the description.
Just doesn't makes sense to me to try to argue against a bug fix.


Im not debating that the spell is bugged on spell side as much as im saying that the description is now wrong at some point. And Im not a fire spec anymore, but a max lightning/acid secondary fire(been doing experimenting). And no it doesnt not reach that near 100 noncrit, Ive tested it thoroughly in PvP and PvE. It does not reach the number youve said unless youve crit or MULTICRIT.

I do admit to never asking those a cast it on if they did get a initial save though. (EDIT Tested on guildy and they said there was no save, so you are right about the spell having no save at all atm)

based on 1d8 noncrit
max: 8 * [1(base) + .5(empower) + 1(max)] * [1(base) + .5(item) + .4(enhancemnt)] = 38 per ele tick.
ave: 4.5 * [1(base) + .5(empower) + 1(max)] * [1(base) + .5(item) + .4(enhancemnt)] = 21.375 per tick
min: 1 * [1(base) + .5(empower) + 1(max)] * [1(base) + .5(item) + .4(enhancemnt)] = 4.75 per ele tick.

So reaching 100 without crit is impossible unless your special and now im jealous.

But on a crit it does get crazy like Any Spell

8 * [1(base) + .5(empower) + 1(max)] * [1(base) + .5(item) + .4(enhancemnt)] * [1.5(base spell crit) + .75(Deadly ElementsIII) + .5(SupLore item) + { assuming debate of multi lores stack for multiplier .5(Second SupLore item) + .25(blue dragon robe)] =

Max: 38 * 2.75{or 3.5} = 104.5{or 133}
Ave: 21.375 * 2.75{or 3.5} = 58.78125{or 74.8125}
Min 4.75 * 2.75{or 3.5} = 13.0625{or 16.625}

ChaosTheEternal
09-09-2007, 08:11 AM
From Complete Arcane...

BURNING BLOOD
Necromancy
Level: Sorcerer/wizard 4
Components: V, S, M
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Range: Medium (100 ft. + 10 ft./level)
Target: One living creature; see text
Duration: 1 round/level (D)
Saving Throw: Fortitude partial; see text
Spell Resistance: Yes

You taint a living creature’s blood with a hot, corrosive infusion, dealing 1d8 points of acid damage and 1d8 points of fire damage per round. The subject can attempt a Fortitude save each round to negate the damage, but a successful save does not prevent damage in future rounds. Searing pain limits the subject to a single move action in any round when it fails its Fortitude save.

Burning blood does not affect creatures of the construct, elemental, ooze, plant, or undead types.

Material Component: A drop of blood and a pinch of saltpeter.
Wanna know what I would do?

(If you don't have sigs on, you won't get it.)

WilbyZ
09-09-2007, 10:10 AM
So with a 40+ Fort you should be able to 'save' against the damage at least most of the time? But, this not the case.. :)

ChaosTheEternal
09-09-2007, 10:40 AM
So with a 40+ Fort you should be able to 'save' against the damage at least most of the time? But, this not the case.. :)It's not the case because, right now, it offers either no save or only a save against the first hit of it, as opposed to a save on every tick (as the spell should be) or a save to negate it (as their description states).

That's what the problem is.

Borror0
09-09-2007, 11:45 AM
Wanna know what I would do?

(If you don't have sigs on, you won't get it.)

Done, I encourage others to do the same.;)

Cowdenicus
09-09-2007, 12:45 PM
I know, why dont we give all melee types blanket spell immunities in the pvp pits, that way they can be total "Haxxor Pwn you" little casters.

Shade
09-09-2007, 12:53 PM
Most DDO spells are not cut and dry like that anyways. Burning blood is weird in that 1d8 is actually 1d8.. Where other 1d8 spells are 1d4+4. Really hard to put together some math and say its accurate being the way DDO does its math is always different per spell.

Anyways, I only seen other sorcs do that dmg to me. My 2ndary sorc that has it is not high enough lvl to max enhancements and doesnt have all the items to boost it, but even he does over 120 on crits per type with only 1 lore item. Regardless, let the dmg discussion die or make a new thread for it as its not the topic of this one.

Thx for posting the PnP version chaos. That one makes sense, a save per every tic would be fair.

Shade
09-09-2007, 12:56 PM
I know, why dont we give all melee types blanket spell immunities in the pvp pits, that way they can be total "Haxxor Pwn you" little casters.

Funny. PvP melee vs caster is actually fairly balanced aside from a couple spells like this. Both classes can near-insta kill each other, but there defenses against each attack for both side, except this broken spell where there no defense and they can just hide or leave the arena while you die.

Cowdenicus
09-09-2007, 01:06 PM
Funny. PvP melee vs caster is actually fairly balanced aside from a couple spells like this. Both classes can near-insta kill each other, but there defenses against each attack for both side, except this broken spell where there no defense and they can just hide or leave the arena while you die.

and there should be no defense against it, that is the way the spell is set up.

Borror0
09-09-2007, 01:36 PM
I know, why dont we give all melee types blanket spell immunities in the pvp pits, that way they can be total "Haxxor Pwn you" little casters.

Really? The thought of Polay Ray scares the heck out of me. 16d6 + all Improvement... no saves... it'll pwn the heck out of us. Burning Blood is bugged, admit it and live with it.

GeneralDiomedes
09-09-2007, 02:07 PM
It's not the case because, right now, it offers either no save or only a save against the first hit of it, as opposed to a save on every tick (as the spell should be) or a save to negate it (as their description states).

That's what the problem is.

The PnP version also prevents you from taking action if you fail your save if I understand it. So the DDO version is more powerful in some respects, but less in others.

On another note, I find it hilarious that one day you see several posts about how Burning Blood is one of the most useless spell in the game, the next day you see one on how it is totally overpowered and needs to be nerfed.

TreknaQudane
09-09-2007, 02:34 PM
The PnP version also prevents you from taking action if you fail your save if I understand it. So the DDO version is more powerful in some respects, but less in others.

On another note, I find it hilarious that one day you see several posts about how Burning Blood is one of the most useless spell in the game, the next day you see one on how it is totally overpowered and needs to be nerfed.

What a difference being killed in pvp makes heh?

ChaosTheEternal
09-09-2007, 02:41 PM
The PnP version also prevents you from taking action if you fail your save if I understand it. So the DDO version is more powerful in some respects, but less in others.And it should have that effect in DDO (probably translatable to a hamstring-esque effect for each failed save, or a nauseated effect, like from Stinking Cloud... ooh, that's more painful).

Either way, they don't have the description and the effect matching. If they want to go about the description, the spell is bugged. If they want to go by the effect... well... they did say some mobs will start using Empower and Maximize (and other Metamagic feats), and if a mob can hit one that does over 30 fire and acid damage a tick, then it really falls into the overpowered boat (and I've been hit by spells from mobs that do over what the dice cap for the spell allows).

Oh, and since the whole spell is affected by either fire or acid items/enhancements (both the base damage increase and the crit chance and multiplier), that's even better. Since these mobs are probably also considered to have class levels... why not expect them to have Potency items that poof when they die or the proper enhancements to boost their damage?

Players casting one like that is a waste of SPs (100 SPs now, 65 at Mod 5) and does less overall damage to mobs (plural for a reason, AoEs do as much or more damage to many mobs and lower level spells can do more damage while costing less). And mobs have infinite SPs, so the damage potential is a lot more dangerous to us.


The big thing that makes Burning Blood useless, for us, is that mobs have inflated HPs and don't make Concentration checks. If at least the latter were different, it'd be more useful.

Shade
09-09-2007, 03:52 PM
Funny you see several posts about how Burning Blood is one of the most useless spell in the game, the next day you see one on how it is totally overpowered and needs to be nerfed.

Wheres the thread asking for it to be nerfed or sayings it overpowered?
Fixing bugs has nothing to do with nerfing.

Polar ray won't be that bad in PvP, unlike burning blood - you can actually dodge it.

Soul-Shaker
09-09-2007, 04:06 PM
Polar ray won't be that bad in PvP, unlike burning blood - you can actually dodge it.

If they nerf the current ray speed and cast time that mobs have atm which I bet they will :(

Lorien_the_First_One
09-09-2007, 04:07 PM
Really sick of dying to a fortitude save spell on my barbarian, who has a +40 fotitude save.

(currently has no save, but description lists it as a fortitude save)

Reported this in game long ago. Please fix this.

Ya should have a fort save, but don't you just drink a fire&acid pot and are fully protected?

Oh, or are you talking PVP? eh...don't really care about PVP :p

Elthbert
09-10-2007, 02:14 AM
Once agian no spell or affect nor anything else should be balanced nor adjusted do to PvP conciderations. Not ever.

BlueLightBandit
09-10-2007, 03:08 AM
Complaint:
In Game Experience different from Description.
or
Burning Blood behaves differently than it's description describes it as.

Solution:
Change either Burning Blood, or its description.

Done:
Turbine has already stated they will change the description.

The End.

Mad_Bombardier
09-10-2007, 10:45 AM
Ya should have a fort save, but don't you just drink a fire&acid pot and are fully protected?

Oh, or are you talking PVP? eh...don't really care about PVP :p


Once agian no spell or affect nor anything else should be balanced nor adjusted do to PvP conciderations. Not ever.Clarification: this has NOTHING to do with PvP! The OP simply experienced/noticed the problem while in PvP.

Burning Blood description was confusing so they changed it. Now, the description is flat-out WRONG. It says, "Save to negate" but a successful save should only remove the first damage tick (effectively buying you time to buff against the effect). Furthermore, there is currently NO SAVE AT ALL. Just like when Holy Smite was broken with no save, and Symbol of Flame was broken with no save.

The save needs to be fixed/reinstated and it needs to prevent the first damage tick ONLY. And the description needs to be rewritten AGAIN, to correctly explain what the save does.

Elthbert
09-10-2007, 11:14 AM
Clarification: this has NOTHING to do with PvP! The OP simply experienced/noticed the problem while in PvP.

Burning Blood description was confusing so they changed it. Now, the description is flat-out WRONG. It says, "Save to negate" but a successful save should only remove the first damage tick (effectively buying you time to buff against the effect). Furthermore, there is currently NO SAVE AT ALL. Just like when Holy Smite was broken with no save, and Symbol of Flame was broken with no save.

The save needs to be fixed/reinstated and it needs to prevent the first damage tick ONLY. And the description needs to be rewritten AGAIN, to correctly explain what the save does.

No the complaint ws about it's effects in PvP, the fact that there is a description issue is irrelevant, he is complaining about getting owned in PvP and asking for a nerf to BB. The fact that it is actually having an issue is irrelevant to The OP's posting. Go back and read his post.

Mad_Bombardier
09-10-2007, 11:30 AM
No the complaint ws about it's effects in PvP, the fact that there is a description issue is irrelevant, he is complaining about getting owned in PvP and asking for a nerf to BB. The fact that it is actually having an issue is irrelevant to The OP's posting. Go back and read his post.The Spell Description is NOT irrrelevant. It's the main point. Here's what the OP has to say about the description/save. Yes, at one point, he did suggest a save against every damage tick. But, that was a tangent and never the primary point. His point was that the current INCORRECT description says, "save to negate" and there is no save. Devs need to change the spell to match the incorrect description or rewrite the description to match the game mechanic.

(currently has no save, but description lists it as a fortitude save)

Reported this in game long ago. Please fix this.


Nope. There was never a save. The description was bugged, they dont mess up desriptions later, they fix them as was noted in the release notes. <snip>

And you get no save roll at all, not even vs the first hit.


Burning Blood - In game description:
You taint a living creatures blood with a hot corrosive infusion, dealing both 1d8 points of acid and 1d8 points of fire per round per caster level. A successful Fortitude save negates this effect.

That reads very clearly to me, save and it doesn't work. Pretty cut and dry, no weird incorrect description - they fixed the description as listed in the release notes.

All I'm asking is for the spell to be fixed so it works per the description.
Just doesn't makes sense to me to try to argue against a bug fix.
<snip>
Again, for the third time. IT HAS NO SAVE. Not even on the initial hit. Nothing is shown in the combat log, there are no rolls, and scrolls land on CR 24 mobs 100% of the time imediately with no initial delay.

So please, if you want to continue to post and say theres a save, go test it first.


Wheres the thread asking for it to be nerfed or sayings it overpowered?
Fixing bugs has nothing to do with nerfing.

Elthbert
09-10-2007, 11:42 AM
The Spell Description is NOT irrrelevant. It's the main point. Here's what the OP has to say about the description/save. Yes, at one point, he did suggest a save against every damage tick. But, that was a tangent and never the primary point. His point was that the current INCORRECT description says, "save to negate" and there is no save. Devs need to change the spell to match the incorrect description or rewrite the description to match the game mechanic.

I really hate it when people only site part of a post in an attempt to manipulate it into saying what they want it to say.

The entire post:


Nope. There was never a save. The description was bugged, they dont mess up desriptions later, they fix them as was noted in the release notes. Having it work as you described would make no sense at all, it hits like 20+ times, stoping 1 hit is useless.

And you get no save roll at all, not even vs the first hit.

And 1d8 is not 1d8 in ddo... You know that. Burning blood does over a 100 damage per tic with max enhance/item/feat, then it hits a ton of times as it lasts like 44 seconds, then with the maximum resist at 30, makes it pretty ******** for PvP as a caster can just hit anyone and then run away until there dead, with no save, no spell resist, no dodging, nothing possible to avoid it.


THe OP is mad about getting executed in PvP... that is his motivation, he is not complaining about so PvE sorcerer doing this to him, but a guy in PvP. Show me a balance issue with the save in an adventure, and I will be a great supporter, but as a PvP issue, well tough, it's nice to a have a spell which actually does damage to the enemy for a change.

Shade
09-10-2007, 11:42 AM
Man nobody can read, not even a guy who quoted me 4 times.

Seriously I think its totally inept to think the descriptiion is wrong, when they already said they fixed the description. Thats like calling turbine an ******, not cool.

My point is much simpler. Make the spell work per the description.

Beleve it or not, the spell functions the same in PvP and PvM. Even if all it does in PvM is cause you to cast a couple buffs, thats not a good reason to ignore a bug.

And just because right now not a single mob max/emps there burning blood does not mean that in the future they wont, then you noobs that never pvp will be here complaining too.

Shade
09-10-2007, 11:46 AM
THe OP is mad about getting executed in PvP... that is his motivation, he is not complaining about so PvE sorcerer doing this to him, but a guy in PvP.

Whats your motivation to post?
Pretty clear - You'd prefer the game keep spells that are clearly bugged for your benefit to use.

Sorry but actually purposely exploiting bugs is actually against the CoC and you could be reported for it. In this case the act is pretty innocent regardless so hard to prove, but the rule remains.

Elthbert
09-10-2007, 11:48 AM
Man nobody can read, not even a guy who quoted me 4 times.

Seriously I think its totally inept to think the descriptiion is wrong, when they already said they fixed the description. Thats like calling turbine an ******, not cool.

My point is much simpler. Make the spell work per the description.

Beleve it or not, the spell functions the same in PvP and PvM. Even if all it does in PvM is cause you to cast a couple buffs, thats not a good reason to ignore a bug.

And just because right now not a single mob max/emps there burning blood does not mean that in the future they wont, then you noobs that never pvp will be here complaining too.

No then it will be a problem, but it is not a problem if it only a pv[ one.. I think the thing should indeed have it's description rewritten to fit, but that is not what you said you wanted.

Shade
09-10-2007, 11:51 AM
No then it will be a problem, but it is not a problem if it only a pv[ one.. I think the thing should indeed have it's description rewritten to fit, but that is not what you said you wanted.

Well what you want, is for turbine to admit there dumb and they messed up the description TWICE. Not only that you want a description that makes no sense and doesn't line up with the PnP version at all.

I want a bug fixed.

Very different.

Elthbert
09-10-2007, 11:57 AM
Whats your motivation to post?
Pretty clear - You'd prefer the game keep spells that are clearly bugged for your benefit to use.

Sorry but actually purposely exploiting bugs is actually against the CoC and you could be reported for it. In this case the act is pretty innocent regardless so hard to prove, but the rule remains.

Oh Please :rolleyes:

I prefer that the thing give you a save every tick. I would also prefer that a 14th barbarian would have about 124 hp not 250 hp, and that maximized /empowered burning blood would do 9-12 hp per element per turn like it should. I would prefer that that +5 weapons were not a joke at 12th level and that wizards were not generally gimped beyond reason.
I do not see this as a bug as much as bad writing on thier discriptions, it seems pretty much in line with the rest of turbines alterations to the D&D game so far.

Elthbert
09-10-2007, 12:01 PM
Well what you want, is for turbine to admit there dumb and they messed up the description TWICE.


Well Yes.


Not only that you want a description that makes no sense and doesn't line up with the PnP version at all.

On the contrary, what you are asking for does not seem to be in line with the PnP version either. But of course barbarians are harldy inline with PnP either now are they. But of course thats okay right?





I want a bug fixed.

Very different.

No you want what you preceived as a problem "fixed" because it annoys you. I am not personally motivated in anyway, I almost never use burning blood, in PvP or in PvE.

Shade
09-10-2007, 04:17 PM
I would also prefer that a 14th barbarian would have about 124 hp not 250 hp.

lol that sounds a bit odd.

250 is normal for PnP. DDO - mine has over 400, or 500+ fully buffed.

168 base max for being a barbarian, lets say he rolled bad tho and only got 110.
Con say 16 +2 dwarf, +4 item, +6 greater rage, +2 rage spell from the friendly gimped wizard = 30 con gives 10 more hit dice = 120
120 + 110 = 230, add say a improved false life item for +20, 250.



No you want what you preceived as a problem "fixed" because it annoys you. I am not personally motivated in anyway, I almost never use burning blood, in PvP or in PvE.
So you just make a negative post for no reason at all, might want to find a better use of your time.