Page 17 of 21 FirstFirst ... 7131415161718192021 LastLast
Results 321 to 340 of 402
  1. #321
    Community Member lain5246's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    139

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zretch View Post
    Really, it's not. It's a tradeoff. A far, far better tradeoff than losing all of the benefits of the capstone plus the KD and 3d6 light damage. The tradeoff is that you can run Death Aura which will give you back some of that damage lost, that scales with your pact spellpower rather than radiance which allows for an extra 200+ spellpower from the Silverthread Belt that you can never get for light/alignment spellpower, and it will heal you. That doesn't include any other damage spells Abyssal locks are getting as included spells.

    Look at the whole picture. A warlock with 2 second aura, brilliance, shining through, staunch, full BaB for PRR, 20% hitpoints with no range restrictions, and a self-heal aura will be stout, even without that precious 3d6 light damage and knockdown immunity. I understood the reason it wasn't going to work with celestial spirit, I simply thought that also wiping out all of the benefits from the capstone as well was crazy punitive. I think the right decision was made.
    finally someone who gets it. thank you, i was loosing faith in the community. also props for looking at the whole picture not just the fluff.

  2. #322
    Community Member Chacka_DDO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Berlin Germany
    Posts
    1,545

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zretch View Post
    Really, it's not. It's a tradeoff. A far, far better tradeoff than losing all of the benefits of the capstone plus the KD and 3d6 light damage. The tradeoff is that you can run Death Aura which will give you back some of that damage lost, that scales with your pact spellpower rather than radiance which allows for an extra 200+ spellpower from the Silverthread Belt that you can never get for light/alignment spellpower, and it will heal you. That doesn't include any other damage spells Abyssal locks are getting as included spells.

    Look at the whole picture. A warlock with 2 second aura, brilliance, shining through, staunch, full BaB for PRR, 20% hitpoints with no range restrictions, and a self-heal aura will be stout, even without that precious 3d6 light damage and knockdown immunity. I understood the reason it wasn't going to work with celestial spirit, I simply thought that also wiping out all of the benefits from the capstone as well was crazy punitive. I think the right decision was made.
    Do I miss something or dont you know that without Celestial Spirit you dont get the 20% hp and full BAB and also not 10 melee and ranged power and 10 universal spell power and the 20 light spell power?
    It is quite unique in DDO that a class has not full access to all of his enhancements, especially not to all of the capstones, my opinion is this is not well designed.
    "Act according to a maxim which can be adopted at the same time as a universal law."
    -Immanuel Kant-

    "Nothing is more fairly distributed than common sense: no one thinks he needs more of it than he already has."
    -René Descartes-

  3. #323
    Community Member lain5246's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    139

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chacka_DDO View Post
    Do I miss something or dont you know that without Celestial Spirit you dont get the 20% hp and full BAB and also not 10 melee and ranged power and 10 universal spell power and the 20 light spell power?
    It is quite unique in DDO that a class has not full access to all of his enhancements, especially not to all of the capstones, my opinion is this is not well designed.
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynnabel View Post
    snip Abyssal Shroud stays a Major Form.

    Celestial Spirit is now: Major Form Toggle: When enabled, you float above the ground, gain Feather Falling, are immune to knockdown effects, and your Eldritch Blasts gain 3d6 Light damage. Your aura now triggers every 2 seconds (does not need toggle active).

    Ultimate Enlightenment is now: +2 CON, +2 CHA. While your Eldritch Aura is enabled, you gain +20% Competence Bonus to Maximum HP, full Base Attack Bonus, +10 Melee Power, +10 Ranged Power, +10 Universal Spell Power, and +20 Light Spell Power.
    helps to look at what devs say.

  4. #324
    Community Member Chacka_DDO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Berlin Germany
    Posts
    1,545

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lain5246 View Post
    helps to look at what devs say.
    Ok, but honestly this is even worse because I dont want to be even more forced to use Eldritch Aura
    "Act according to a maxim which can be adopted at the same time as a universal law."
    -Immanuel Kant-

    "Nothing is more fairly distributed than common sense: no one thinks he needs more of it than he already has."
    -René Descartes-

  5. #325
    Community Member Seljuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    509

    Thumbs down Proposed changes are bad

    Quote Originally Posted by Lynnabel View Post
    Me neither, but if I'm missing something please let me know so we can change course before release :P
    With this change You are nerfing survivability of probably more than 90% of warlocks in game.
    Eldritch aura is weak and is used only in sporadic situations.. like in king forest portal slayer. Any oriented player who wants to keep the largest possible dps uses Eldritch Cone and Burst/Blast if needed.

    With proposed change, every warlock in game who is focused on running content on higher difficulty then normal or hard will need to chose..
    1. Lose 20% hp (which is extreme nerf) but keep good aoe dps from Eldritch Cone
    or
    2. Lose dps (again quite a big nerf) from eldritch Cone but keep 20% HP.

    Note that:
    - temporary buffs from aura, require from warlock to be near opponnets and other players, for example melee and that might increase warlock death counts. It will also require to change play style for people.
    - Eldritch Burst and Blast CAN be used with Eldritch cone, so indicating that you will have an burst and blast as a substitute of Cone are missed.

    With proposed change, I would rather You to not do any warlock changes at all.

    EDIT: Eldritch Aura is mostly targeted for people who want to play mele/tank with warlock class splashed.. but again.. warlock don't have anything exciting to consider it for mele/ranged splash. Your proposition don't change it, if we need to take 20 lv of warlock to use it on splash.. ?

    I have specifically logged into the game to see how many potential warlock mele splashes we have on cannith at the moment of posting this post.. and it looks like this:
    Last edited by Seljuck; 05-28-2020 at 05:56 AM.
    >>Officer of the Polish Guild: GildiaDDOpl<<>>Cannith<<
    Isioviel Jr'eness - the Completionist
    Finghin Al'Roeg 4rd life Warlock .......Seljuck 5th life 14ftr/5art/1wiz
    If you like my posts, consider adding to my reputation. Thank You.

  6. #326
    Systems Designer
    Lynnabel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    game/cdb/effect/effects-property-2.cdb
    Posts
    2,751

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chacka_DDO View Post
    Ok, but honestly this is even worse because I dont want to be even more forced to use Eldritch Aura
    That wasn't the latest version, here's the actual current plan

    Quote Originally Posted by Lynnabel View Post
    Core 18: Major Form Toggle: When enabled, you float above the ground, gain Feather Falling, are immune to most knockdown effects, and your Eldritch Blasts gain 3d6 Light damage. Passive: Your Eldritch Aura now affects enemies every 2 seconds.

    Capstone: +2 CON, +2 CHA, +20% Competence bonus to Maximum HP, +10 Universal Spellpower, +20 Light Spellpower. While your Eldritch Aura is enabled, you gain full Base Attack Bonus, +10 Melee Power, and +10 Ranged Power.
    100% radical, enthusiasm enthusiast.

  7. #327
    Community Member SerPounce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    1,866

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zretch View Post
    Really, it's not. It's a tradeoff. A far, far better tradeoff than losing all of the benefits of the capstone plus the KD and 3d6 light damage. The tradeoff is that you can run Death Aura which will give you back some of that damage lost, that scales with your pact spellpower rather than radiance which allows for an extra 200+ spellpower from the Silverthread Belt that you can never get for light/alignment spellpower, and it will heal you. That doesn't include any other damage spells Abyssal locks are getting as included spells.

    Look at the whole picture. A warlock with 2 second aura, brilliance, shining through, staunch, full BaB for PRR, 20% hitpoints with no range restrictions, and a self-heal aura will be stout, even without that precious 3d6 light damage and knockdown immunity. I understood the reason it wasn't going to work with celestial spirit, I simply thought that also wiping out all of the benefits from the capstone as well was crazy punitive. I think the right decision was made.
    So many problems with this.

    First you're sidestepping the context. It can be both a trade off and a substantial loss. You guys were saying that 3d6 light damage added to eldritch blast was trivial. It's not, it's a good chunk of DPS, particularly against pact damage immune mobs. Pointing out that you're wrong about the importance of that damage isn't necessarily a statement about overall balance. It's good for the conversation to correct misinformation (e.g. the claim that the "3d6 light damage" from celestial spirit form is a non-scaling guard effect) regardless of your overall conclusions. Maybe that substantial loss is a reasonable trade off for something else, maybe it isn't, but it's completely reasonable to point out it's real value.

    Second, death aura isn't remotely similar. It doesn't apply to bursts/blasts, which are a larger source of dps than the passive aura (due to free metas), it has slower tick rate, it has a smaller range, and lots of mobs are immune to it (unlike light damage). Not really on the same scale at all.

    Third, it misses the big issue of why abyss locks need a "trade off" with ES, but not other trees? ES isn't even meta at this point (to what extent any lock is meta right now). Why is it that abyss + ES in particular needs to be limited because it's too powerful? The only serious ES lock I know is Voodu, and while he can speak for himself, I really doubt he would be interested in abyssal because the build is highly reliant on multi-source positive energy healing. No way it's worth it to nerf your renewal, cocoon, consecration, and external healing all for a measly death aura tick. Sure there's some synergy there for a tanky solo build, but it hardly seems like this game-breaking combo that needs to be preemptively nerfed.

    The whole thing seems like a silly restriction on a pact that's probably better off in soul eater anyway.
    Last edited by SerPounce; 05-28-2020 at 06:28 AM.
    Sabbath - Sarlona

  8. #328
    Community Member Chacka_DDO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Berlin Germany
    Posts
    1,545

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lynnabel View Post
    That wasn't the latest version, here's the actual current plan
    OK, I think that's overall a good compromise.
    It is just only left that a warlock without full Base Attack Bonus has less Physical Resistance Rating but this is something that should be solved in another way in my opinion.
    I see no point why a caster without full BAB should have less PRR than a fighter and I also dont see why a caster should have more PRR than a fighter if he has "magically" full BAB.
    The PRR calculation should instead be based on the character level and not the BAB.

    And I still hope that the celestial pact gets light as pact damage because this fits thematically clearly much better to a celestial patron.
    It is in my opinion very important that a celestial warlock "feels" like such a warlock and this is at least for me majorly harmed if he has electrical pact damage.
    If the reason for this lays in balancing there certainly other ways to balance that than giving the wrong type of pact damage.
    But even without additional balance steps, light damage would not overpower this pact in my opinion, it would make it just only a very good choice.

    And I still wonder if it is intended that Channel the Abyss provides only a quarter of the negative healing a wizard undead form receives (with the same negative healing amplification).
    Of course, I hope I did no mistake on my testing but if we see another Lamannia preview I can make a more meaningful test.
    "Act according to a maxim which can be adopted at the same time as a universal law."
    -Immanuel Kant-

    "Nothing is more fairly distributed than common sense: no one thinks he needs more of it than he already has."
    -René Descartes-

  9. #329
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    3

    Default

    I agree that ES lock's should not lose the benefit of additional PRR from medium armor just because they are adding new Pacts. Add + 15 PRR to Ultimate Enlightenment and subtract 15 PRR if you aura is enabled to prevent double dipping. We don't need to weaken the existing builds in order to add flexibility if some simple thought can avoid it.

  10. #330
    Community Member lain5246's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    139

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SerPounce View Post
    So many problems with this.

    First you're sidestepping the context. It can be both a trade off and a substantial loss. You guys were saying that 3d6 light damage added to eldritch blast was trivial. It's not, it's a good chunk of DPS, particularly against pact damage immune mobs. Pointing out that you're wrong about the importance of that damage isn't necessarily a statement about overall balance. It's good for the conversation to correct misinformation (e.g. the claim that the "3d6 light damage" from celestial spirit form is a non-scaling guard effect) regardless of your overall conclusions. Maybe that substantial loss is a reasonable trade off for something else, maybe it isn't, but it's completely reasonable to point out it's real value.

    Second, death aura isn't remotely similar. It doesn't apply to bursts/blasts, which are a larger source of dps than the passive aura (due to free metas), it has slower tick rate, it has a smaller range, and lots of mobs are immune to it (unlike light damage). Not really on the same scale at all.

    Third, it misses the big issue of why abyss locks need a "trade off" with ES, but not other trees? ES isn't even meta at this point (to what extent any lock is meta right now). Why is it that abyss + ES in particular needs to be limited because it's too powerful? The only serious ES lock I know is Voodu, and while he can speak for himself, I really doubt he would be interested in abyssal because the build is highly reliant on multi-source positive energy healing. No way it's worth it to nerf your renewal, cocoon, consecration, and external healing all for a measly death aura tick. Sure there's some synergy there for a tanky solo build, but it hardly seems like this game-breaking combo that needs to be preemptively nerfed.

    The whole thing seems like a silly restriction on a pact that's probably better off in soul eater anyway.
    first: it is a trade off. the dmg for imunities, the fact it is tied to the spirit form means that abyss is not the only correct choice for locks. as someone who uses pm on live i can say that the immunites are far better than you realize. the 3d6 light dmg being tied to the form is acceptable otherwise there would be no reason to choose any other pact from a numbers perspective. on a side note with the light dmg being tied to spirit form it maintains the extra dmg for all blast shapes. If you want to be fair than you are sidestepping the issue we keep saying because you want more dmg. the original issue people had with the form was you loose out on all the perks for es core 18/capstone because forms were exclusive, and the form had no buffs. the form got buffs and than was still lacking without es form. the major parts of the form/capstone get tied to aura and the core 18 form is left with knockdown immunity, ff, and 3d6 light dmg. now you want the light dmg moved to the aura? the devs have been very considerate to not scrap es or lock abyss from it, yet you want to argue needs more light dmg... get over it man. if abyss needs to be buffed more it can happen when the update trees.

    second: as irrelevant as before. dmg for imunities.

    third: abyss works just fine with es, if you dont use major form. if you use major form you loose out on other major form. as for healing get good man. or ask your robot friends how they heal. I play almost exclusively as pm/ek and i can get my heal amp up enough to feel fine using those to self heal in r1, so in high reaper i do ok in party. while i am a bit squishy at 400 prr, i feel confidant in going in on high reapers in a group. with the temp hp, steal life force, and aura i should be good through r5, and with heal amp i should be fine in party. and if i am worried about hp i can run in exalted angel for more heals. over all the healing is more than adequate for the same settings as a pm on live.

    in summery, 3d6 light dmg being tied to celestial spirit not an issue, abyss undead form being exclusive from celestial spirit not an issue. undead not healing as much from positive not relevant to 3d6 light dmg. pacts are not required to be meta, also something can be exclusive without being meta.

    i think that abyss is in a good place for now. need to test it out as it stands right now but if it were to go live right now i would be playing it.

  11. #331
    Community Member lain5246's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    139

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chacka_DDO View Post
    OK, I think that's overall a good compromise.
    It is just only left that a warlock without full Base Attack Bonus has less Physical Resistance Rating but this is something that should be solved in another way in my opinion.
    I see no point why a caster without full BAB should have less PRR than a fighter and I also dont see why a caster should have more PRR than a fighter if he has "magically" full BAB.
    The PRR calculation should instead be based on the character level and not the BAB.

    And I still hope that the celestial pact gets light as pact damage because this fits thematically clearly much better to a celestial patron.
    It is in my opinion very important that a celestial warlock "feels" like such a warlock and this is at least for me majorly harmed if he has electrical pact damage.
    If the reason for this lays in balancing there certainly other ways to balance that than giving the wrong type of pact damage.
    But even without additional balance steps, light damage would not overpower this pact in my opinion, it would make it just only a very good choice.

    And I still wonder if it is intended that Channel the Abyss provides only a quarter of the negative healing a wizard undead form receives (with the same negative healing amplification).
    Of course, I hope I did no mistake on my testing but if we see another Lamannia preview I can make a more meaningful test.
    man, you disappoint me with this statement. prr is tied to bab because it is intended for melee players. casters getting bab is to help melee builds like es and ek.
    celestial pact is something i could care less about though to be fair if it was light than that would be the only choice for locks as one spell power to scale off of would be broken.
    lastly, testing is good.

  12. #332
    Community Member lain5246's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    139

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Blinkingstar View Post
    I agree that ES lock's should not lose the benefit of additional PRR from medium armor just because they are adding new Pacts. Add + 15 PRR to Ultimate Enlightenment and subtract 15 PRR if you aura is enabled to prevent double dipping. We don't need to weaken the existing builds in order to add flexibility if some simple thought can avoid it.
    prr is if you are trying to be melee. this idea is as bad as the 3d6 light dmg being moved from celestial spirit
    Last edited by lain5246; 05-28-2020 at 10:29 AM. Reason: celestial

  13. #333
    Community Member Chacka_DDO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Berlin Germany
    Posts
    1,545

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lain5246 View Post
    man, you disappoint me with this statement. prr is tied to bab because it is intended for melee players. casters getting bab is to help melee builds like es and ek.
    celestial pact is something i could care less about though to be fair if it was light than that would be the only choice for locks as one spell power to scale off of would be broken.
    lastly, testing is good.
    Yes, I also assume that the idea of the PRR calculation based on BAB is to help melee but the result is that many caster builds have more BAB than classic melee classes because they use spells like Trenser's, etc.
    In the end, also melees are forced to use such effects who provide full BAB to them and the result of all this is at the very end that your BAB is equal to your character level.
    This issue is most likely also increased by the coming level cap increase because the BAB of classic melee should not increase while the BAB with effects like Trensers is still equal to your character level.
    The next thing is that I dont see the point in general why BAB should affect your defensive.
    And if you want to help melee with better PRR/MRR then you should give this to them in another way, like a combat style bonus for PRR/MRR if you SWF/THF/TWF.
    Not to forget that archer builds receive also the same BAB and with this the PRR.
    My personal conclusion out of all this is that BAB is not the right base to calculate the PRR in many cases the result is any way that your character level is the base, and to keep that simple its, in my opinion, better to make the character level the base from the start.
    And as I said, if you want to help melee with better defenses give them bonuses in another way which is more effective.
    "Act according to a maxim which can be adopted at the same time as a universal law."
    -Immanuel Kant-

    "Nothing is more fairly distributed than common sense: no one thinks he needs more of it than he already has."
    -René Descartes-

  14. #334
    Community Member Seljuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    509

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lain5246 View Post
    prr is if you are trying to be melee. this idea is as bad as the 3d6 light dmg being moved from celestial spirit
    So in your opinion casters shouldn't care about PRR ??
    >>Officer of the Polish Guild: GildiaDDOpl<<>>Cannith<<
    Isioviel Jr'eness - the Completionist
    Finghin Al'Roeg 4rd life Warlock .......Seljuck 5th life 14ftr/5art/1wiz
    If you like my posts, consider adding to my reputation. Thank You.

  15. #335
    Systems Designer
    Lynnabel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    game/cdb/effect/effects-property-2.cdb
    Posts
    2,751

    Default

    Sorry to bring the conversation all the way back around but Holy Aura now uses the Sacred channel for its buff and lasts 1 min/caster level :P

    (I know that the sacred channel for saves conflicts with Paladin's Sacred Defense, but I don't think any other channel really fits here and if the spell goes from 99% useless to 2% useless that's still a win. I can keep adjusting upwards but for this patch it'll likely stay as Sacred.)
    100% radical, enthusiasm enthusiast.

  16. #336
    Community Member SerPounce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    1,866

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lain5246 View Post
    first: it is a trade off. the dmg for imunities, the fact it is tied to the spirit form means that abyss is not the only correct choice for locks. as someone who uses pm on live i can say that the immunites are far better than you realize. the 3d6 light dmg being tied to the form is acceptable otherwise there would be no reason to choose any other pact from a numbers perspective. on a side note with the light dmg being tied to spirit form it maintains the extra dmg for all blast shapes. If you want to be fair than you are sidestepping the issue we keep saying because you want more dmg. the original issue people had with the form was you loose out on all the perks for es core 18/capstone because forms were exclusive, and the form had no buffs. the form got buffs and than was still lacking without es form. the major parts of the form/capstone get tied to aura and the core 18 form is left with knockdown immunity, ff, and 3d6 light dmg. now you want the light dmg moved to the aura? the devs have been very considerate to not scrap es or lock abyss from it, yet you want to argue needs more light dmg... get over it man. if abyss needs to be buffed more it can happen when the update trees.

    second: as irrelevant as before. dmg for imunities.

    third: abyss works just fine with es, if you dont use major form. if you use major form you loose out on other major form. as for healing get good man. or ask your robot friends how they heal. I play almost exclusively as pm/ek and i can get my heal amp up enough to feel fine using those to self heal in r1, so in high reaper i do ok in party. while i am a bit squishy at 400 prr, i feel confidant in going in on high reapers in a group. with the temp hp, steal life force, and aura i should be good through r5, and with heal amp i should be fine in party. and if i am worried about hp i can run in exalted angel for more heals. over all the healing is more than adequate for the same settings as a pm on live.

    in summery, 3d6 light dmg being tied to celestial spirit not an issue, abyss undead form being exclusive from celestial spirit not an issue. undead not healing as much from positive not relevant to 3d6 light dmg. pacts are not required to be meta, also something can be exclusive without being meta.

    i think that abyss is in a good place for now. need to test it out as it stands right now but if it were to go live right now i would be playing it.
    It's not that Abyssal is necessarily weak, I'll reserve judgement till I play it, or that ES is weak (though it's not meta), but if this goes live as is there will be no reason to do Abyssal + ES. If you do ES you'll do an different pact, because why lose 20% of your neg immune DPS? And if you do abyssal you'll use a different tree (probably soul eater), because why use a tree that nerfed for your pact when the other two aren't (and probably stronger anyway). They're preemptively nerfing a pact+tree combo that doesn't have any particular synergy to start with.

    It's like nerfing dwarf rogues, sure dwarf would still be fine and rogue would still be fine, but why are we trying to cut down the mighty dwarf-rogue combo?

    I really don't care that much about abyssal enlightened spirits. It's the lack of any coherent design reasoning that makes me want to pull my hair out. This reminds me of the last update where stalwart pact was given +1 melee power /CL. Then it was taken away because they didn't like the flavor of melee power will a spell called "stalwart pact". Then when people responded "uh, what about the 25 melee power?" and the response was basically "oh, you guys care about 25 stacking melee power? I guess we'll add 15 back in with a different spell." None of it makes any sense, it's like they're pulling numbers out of a hat. I just want some *reason* why you'd take away 20% of the reliable DPS from a build other than "well, it's a major form" which doesn't make sense. If there was some reason why Abyss + ES was a game breaker then sure, I'm not seeing that, it's all so arbitrary.
    Sabbath - Sarlona

  17. #337
    Systems Designer
    Lynnabel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    game/cdb/effect/effects-property-2.cdb
    Posts
    2,751

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SerPounce View Post
    This reminds me of the last update where stalwart pact was given +1 melee power /CL. Then it was taken away because they didn't like the flavor of melee power will a spell called "stalwart pact". Then when people responded "uh, what about the 25 melee power?" and the response was basically "oh, you guys care about 25 stacking melee power? I guess we'll add 15 back in with a different spell."
    This kind of oscillation is common when more than one designer works together on a particular feature, and I think part of this feeling stems from how it's rare for players to see this kind of rapid iteration. My goal is to get a balanced game that provides the most fun to as many people as possible, and sometimes that means we change our minds and then change our minds again. I think listening to player feedback is very important, and if as a result the lamannia threads get a little cluttered, to me that's a small price to pay for a genuinely better game.
    Last edited by Lynnabel; 05-28-2020 at 11:35 AM.
    100% radical, enthusiasm enthusiast.

  18. #338
    Community Member Alttab's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    65

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lynnabel View Post
    Sorry to bring the conversation all the way back around but Holy Aura now uses the Sacred channel for its buff and lasts 1 min/caster level :P

    (I know that the sacred channel for saves conflicts with Paladin's Sacred Defense, but I don't think any other channel really fits here and if the spell goes from 99% useless to 2% useless that's still a win. I can keep adjusting upwards but for this patch it'll likely stay as Sacred.)
    At least the spell will be worth something. What about the spell resistance check, is it removed now?
    Would have been nice if it added some PRR and with less duration, but this is ok I guess.
    Could have also a part that debuff evil creatures melee power to replace the blind guard part of the spell.
    We could then see the spell being cast in the middle of a battle instead of just at the beginning of the quest.

  19. #339
    Community Member lain5246's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    139

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Seljuck View Post
    So in your opinion casters shouldn't care about PRR ??
    no, i feel casters don't need full bab, or it comes at a penalty, if you look at all other casters they either get it at tier 5 melee, loose casting range or dont have it at all, looking at druid. The idea that every thing has to be homogenized is uninteresting to me. if you are casting spells or eldritch blasting you should be moving around like an archer. i mean by the logic of give more prr to make up for lack bab, the cloth armor should have prr as plate armor. on top of which you already benefit better than other casters as you get 20% more hp than other casters.

  20. #340
    Community Member SerPounce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    1,866

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lynnabel View Post
    This kind of oscillation is common when more than one designer works together on a particular feature, and I think part of this feeling stems from how it's rare for players to see this kind of rapid iteration. My goal is to get a balanced game that provides the most fun to as many people as possible, and sometimes that means we change our minds and then change our minds again. I think listening to player feedback is very important, and if as a result the lamannia threads get a little cluttered, to me that's a small price to pay for a genuinely better game.
    Sure, and you guys make a great game, and I appreciate all the work you do, and all the great communication we get these days (from all the devs and you in particular). These conversations make the game much more enjoyable to me even if it doesn't always come off that way. I just wonder what some of the particular reasoning is for the mechanical changes. Like why is it you think that Abyssal +ES is a overpowered combo? Not just that "major forms don't stack" because that's not really a deep balance thing as any of this could be in or out of a form, but why say a ES feylock should get 3d6 more light damage than an ES abysslock? Maybe there is a good reasons, but I never saw it explained, nor to I get it intuitively.

    Or with pally, why did we go from 0 spell melee power to 25 (give or take) to 15? All we ever saw for reasoning was "stalwart pack sounds defensive," which I agree with, but is tangential to the mechanical changes either way. It's not that I feel strongly that it should be 0, 15, or 25, I just wonder how those numbers get decided and hope it's not based on how spell names sound.
    Last edited by SerPounce; 05-28-2020 at 11:48 AM.
    Sabbath - Sarlona

Page 17 of 21 FirstFirst ... 7131415161718192021 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

This form's session has expired. You need to reload the page.

Reload