Thought spike only does a 1d7+4 + artificer level at max charge (tier 2)
OMG 1d7 that isn't even possible !, is it ?
maybe it's 3d3+2 i've seen those dices.
Thought spike only does a 1d7+4 + artificer level at max charge (tier 2)
OMG 1d7 that isn't even possible !, is it ?
maybe it's 3d3+2 i've seen those dices.
Current developments and guess-timates
Developer quote tracking on DDOWiki Classes: Psion Profile Races:Kalashtar Profile, Shifter Profile, Kobold Profile
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zonbLF-NMZgOriginally Posted by Turbine
I'd guess 2d4+3
Just for fun, try finding the dices on the other numbers, you can't make a straight progression of it it seems.
3-6 1d4+2
5-11 2d4+3
6-16
7-21
8-26
Current developments and guess-timates
Developer quote tracking on DDOWiki Classes: Psion Profile Races:Kalashtar Profile, Shifter Profile, Kobold Profile
In Red
Seems like those should be right.
The progression is that the max damage increases by 5 each step while, with the exception of the step between tier 1 and 2(which increases by 2), the minimum damage only increases by 1. previous min +1 to previous max + 5 with step 2 being tier1 min+2 to tier1 max +5
It would make more sense if tier 1 was 4-6 or 1d3+3 and tier2 3d3+2.
Then you would have:
4-6 1d3 + 3
5-11 3d3 + 2
6-16 5d3 + 1
7-21 7d3
8-26 9d3 -1
This way the progression is instantly clear.
Last edited by Avidus; 08-12-2011 at 01:06 PM. Reason: added stuff
~ Rukan 4/3 pal/mnk(Past Life mnk x3) ~ Ignavus 16 wiz(Past Life sor/wiz) ~ Styphon 20 Game Deformer(Past Life Clr) ~~ Wyek 7/6 mnk/ftr ~ Lystara 5/6/2 ftr/rng/mnk ~ Tinder 12 brb ~~ Broken Talons ~
The max charge should be put somewhere obvious and readily visible for each arm that does not go all the way to tier 5 to eliminate confusion and an influx of unnecessary bug reports (which clog the pipes and slow down real bug report resolution).
For example: Put a field on Rune Arms called "Max charge level" in the decription right after "Feat Required: Rune arm use"
There are two progressions. Elemental, and Force/Light.
Elemental:
Tier I: 2d4+2 + (1 per Artificer Level)
Tier II: 2d6+3 + (1d2 per Artificer Level)
Tier III: 2d8+4 + (1d4 per Artificer Level)
Tier IV: 2d10+5 + (1d6 per Artificer Level)
Tier V: 2d12+6 + (1d8 per Artificer Level)
Force/Light:
Tier I: 1d4+2 + (1 per 2 Artificer Levels)
Tier II: 2d4+3 + (1 per Artificer Level)
Tier III: 2d6+4 + (1d2 per Artificer Level)
Tier IV: 2d8+5 + (1d4 per Artificer Level)
Tier V: 2d10+6 + (1d6 per Artificer Level)
Current developments and guess-timates
Developer quote tracking on DDOWiki Classes: Psion Profile Races:Kalashtar Profile, Shifter Profile, Kobold Profile
The caster's spell damage amplification effects and enhancements modify the rune arm's damage. Metamagics do not affect any of the rune arm spells at this time. They use your Artificer level as their caster level and your Intelligence modifier - it's more or less as if you were casting a spell through the relic. The spells count as having a level equal to their charge tier plus one.
Current developments and guess-timates
Developer quote tracking on DDOWiki Classes: Psion Profile Races:Kalashtar Profile, Shifter Profile, Kobold Profile
Sprulok TR 20 dark monk/ Spruloki lvl 20 TR'd Exploiter / Magnetik "aka Miss Piggy" TR'd 12ftr/6rgr/2monk/ tank / Trixxii lvl 20 TR'd light monk/ Bllaak Stabbath lvl 20 tr'd assassin/ Axetress lvl 14 juggernaut Zenaidemule --------------- Ghallanda server-------------Officer of the Captain's Crew
That, and the Disrupt Undead one from Delera's. They cast spells instead of pew pewing, and instead of charging to gain their power, have charges themselves.
Edit:
And according to below, they are supposed to shoot.
It will be interesting so see how they dealt with the same item having two different clickies (if that's the case). Or if the Disrupt Undead one was indicative of a light damage spell and the Freeze on was indicative of a cold damage spell, so they knew which damage type to add onto it when they got around to doing so, and the clickies would then be replaced entirely. Just a coding placeholder for future modification maybe?
Last edited by Calebro; 08-12-2011 at 01:39 PM.