The Official Warchanter Lamannia Feedback Thread

[maddmatt70]

Without Bladeforged its a 90 DC anyways.
.

Maybe if you keep repeating the same things over and over they will become true, but the math has already proven you wrong so whatever.

[Takllin]

Maybe if you keep repeating the same things over and over they will become true, but the math has already proven you wrong so whatever.

Ummm what math? I've already proved how this DC can be achieved in an alternate forum. I've yet to see someone disprove this.

14 Base + 30(CHA) + 18 Bard + 3 Kensai + 14 Stunning Item + 6 Combat Mastery + 6 LD Tactics + 1 Fatesinger + 3 GoMF + 3 Fighter PL + 2 Tactician + 10 PDK CHA over STR Tactics = 110

That is as an 18 Bard/2 Fighter PDK build. You want to bump charisma down to 50, as anyone/everyone can easily get a 50...and it is still at 100.

So tell me where exactly my math is wrong? Or some math that disproves what I've just provided? Also, I thought it was 106 earlier, it can actually hit 110, if you waste a Tier 4 Twist and use GoMF. 106 would be the DC in LD with realistic twists.

Maybe if you keep telling me my math is wrong over and over again, it will become true, but math has proven that my number is correct so whatever.

[maddmatt70]

Ummm what math? I've already proved how this DC can be achieved in an alternate forum. I've yet to see someone disprove this.

14 Base + 30(CHA) + 18 Bard + 3 Kensai + 14 Stunning Item + 6 Combat Mastery + 6 LD Tactics + 1 Fatesinger + 3 GoMF + 3 Fighter PL + 2 Tactician + 10 PDK CHA over STR Tactics = 110

That is as an 18 Bard/2 Fighter PDK build. You want to bump charisma down to 50, as anyone/everyone can easily get a 50...and it is still at 100.

So tell me where exactly my math is wrong? Or some math that disproves what I've just provided? Also, I thought it was 106 earlier, it can actually hit 110, if you waste a Tier 4 Twist and use GoMF. 106 would be the DC in LD with realistic twists.

Maybe if you keep telling me my math is wrong over and over again, it will become true, but math has proven that my number is correct so whatever.

It is not 18 bard its 9 bard because its 1/2 bard levels. The example you used was not a PDK so shrug.

[Mryal]

You fail at reading....Tactic DC increases do in fact work on it. It is possible to achieve a 106 DC with it as a PDK, and no I'm not making this up, it is entirely possible. You can easily get a higher DC on Frozen Fury and Spinning Ice than Stunning Blow without as much investment.

How does tactical DC work on it? I just tested on lamania and neither Legendary Tactics,Stunning + 10 item, combat maestry item or Grandmaster ED increased the DC.What exactly did you actualy test that is working on it?
Did you try that with latest lamania build from 2 or so days ago.

[Takllin]

It is not 18 bard its 9 bard because its 1/2 bard levels. The example you used was not a PDK so shrug.

Varg posted that the amount of Bard level increases per rank...so were assuming that at 3rd rank it is full Bard level...

Would you like me to show you the Bladeforged DC too? Here

14 Base + 20 Bard + 28 CHA Mod + 10 Ring + 6 Combat Mastery + 6 LD Tactics + 3 Bladeforged + 2 Tactician + 1 Echoes Twist + 3 Fighter PL + 2 Fearsome Bladeforged = 95 DC

That wasn't including items/ED stuff I forgot about, so it could be even higher. Again, where is my math wrong?

[Lifespawn]

Ummm what math? I've already proved how this DC can be achieved in an alternate forum. I've yet to see someone disprove this.

14 Base + 30(CHA) + 18 Bard + 3 Kensai + 14 Stunning Item + 6 Combat Mastery + 6 LD Tactics + 1 Fatesinger + 3 GoMF + 3 Fighter PL + 2 Tactician + 10 PDK CHA over STR Tactics = 110

That is as an 18 Bard/2 Fighter PDK build. You want to bump charisma down to 50, as anyone/everyone can easily get a 50...and it is still at 100.

So tell me where exactly my math is wrong? Or some math that disproves what I've just provided? Also, I thought it was 106 earlier, it can actually hit 110, if you waste a Tier 4 Twist and use GoMF. 106 would be the DC in LD with realistic twists.

Maybe if you keep telling me my math is wrong over and over again, it will become true, but math has proven that my number is correct so whatever.

this requires a 70 cha breakdown plz can't access other place at work

14 stun item?

50 cha would drop the dc by 16 10 from stat and 4 from pdk 1/3

doesn't gmof require you to be centered to use the tactical bonus? if not it should

[Dilbon]

It is not 18 bard its 9 bard because its 1/2 bard levels. The example you used was not a PDK so shrug.

Rank 1 is half bard levels. It's assumed that rank 3 is full bard.

[Takllin]

How does tactical DC work on it? I just tested on lamania and neither Legendary Tactics,Stunning + 10 item, combat maestry item or Grandmaster ED increased the DC.What exactly did you actualy test that is working on it?
Did you try that with latest lamania build from 2 or so days ago.

Lamannia does not have the updated formula that Varg posted in the forums.

[Lifespawn]

Varg posted that the amount of Bard level increases per rank...so were assuming that at 3rd rank it is full Bard level...

Would you like me to show you the Bladeforged DC too? Here

14 Base + 20 Bard + 28 CHA Mod + 10 Ring + 6 Combat Mastery + 6 LD Tactics + 3 Bladeforged + 2 Tactician + 1 Echoes Twist + 3 Fighter PL + 2 Fearsome Bladeforged = 95 DC

That wasn't including items/ED stuff I forgot about, so it could be even higher. Again, where is my math wrong?

bladeforged is possible but very expensive 2 lesser and an alignment change plus an lr20?

wf is close but just use 2 instead of the 3 dc because of the lower cha no need to hyperbole the max leet11!! 200 dollar build lesser it will be high but not as high on a normal player 75 or so will be the usual dc.

[Takllin]

this requires a 70 cha breakdown plz can't access other place at work

14 stun item?

50 cha would drop the dc by 16 10 from stat and 4 from pdk 1/3

doesn't gmof require you to be centered to use the tactical bonus? if not it should

Dazing IX

True, PDK Tactics bonus would go down, either 3 or 4, depending on whether or not they round up. Down 13 or 14 not 16.

[Takllin]

bladeforged is possible but very expensive 2 lesser and an alignment change plus an lr20?

wf is close but just use 2 instead of the 3 dc because of the lower cha no need to hyperbole the max leet11!! 200 dollar build lesser it will be high but not as high on a normal player 75 or so will be the usual dc.

Yeah, PDK has a higher DC anyways. Can forget about the BF DC.

[Mryal]

Lamannia does not have the updated formula that Varg posted in the forums.

Right.I missed that.You're right then, the formula is broken as hell.

[Aelonwy]

Why does everything have to be this excruciatingly complicated?! This, that, and the other stacks, make sure your the optimal race, have the optimal gear, with the right number of the correct past lives, have the optimal twists... oh and don't forget to twiddle your thumbs while standing in a circle under a blue moon!!!

AAAAaaaarrrrghhhhh!!! I feel like Charlie Brown with the d*mn football, not just for this particular enhancement but for soooo many things on each and every character.


This was ridiculous a couple of years ago, forget ridiculous we've reached Ludicrous Speed!


Sorry just had to get that off my chest, please continue...

[maddmatt70]

Rank 1 is half bard levels. It's assumed that rank 3 is full bard.

Why? Rank 3 could just as easily be just a shorter cooldown and the like. Its obvious that the dc is a bit high, so no need for these embellishments of the DC just state the facts and not these bizarre bonus which nobody likely has or guesses. Should a warchanter bard have an aoe stun? In my opinion absolutely they should because a warchanter really lacks other cc and one of the things bards specialize in is CC. A second question is should the warchanter aoe stun have no save or close to no save or should it have a save that is difficult to get high. What should be the target for the devs? Fascinate in DDO has really basically no save so should this aoe stun be like fascinate? I never really understood the tie in with charisma for this actually, but what have you.

[Takllin]

Why? Rank 3 could just as easily be just a shorter cooldown and the like. Its obvious that the dc is a bit high, so no need for these embellishments of the DC just state the facts and not these bizarre bonus which nobody likely has or guesses. Should a warchanter bard have an aoe stun? In my opinion absolutely they should because a warchanter really lacks other cc and one of the things bards specialize in is CC. A second question is should the warchanter aoe stun have no save or close to no save or should it have a save that is difficult to get high. What should be the target for the devs? Fascinate in DDO has really basically no save so should this aoe stun be like fascinate? I never really understood the tie in with charisma for this actually, but what have you.

Because Varg stated that increased ranks in Spinning Ice, increases the amount of Bard levels towards the DC of the ability.....

In bold below...

Some changes we're working on:

• To clarify & update, the AP cost of the following enhancements become 1 per rank: Iced Edges, Frozen Fury, Spinning Ice, Chant of Power
• Increase PRR from Warmaster to +15 (still a Music Bonus).
• Frozen Fury and Spinning Ice Difficulty checks adjusted to be generally of the form: "Attack enemies around you with a weapon for +2(W) damage. Each enemy is frozen solid if they fail a Fortitude save (14 + Charisma modifier + 1/2 Bard Level + Stunning modifiers), for a number of seconds equal to your half your Bard level. Bosses cannot be frozen." Increased ranks increases how much Bard levels contribute.
• Expeditious Chant and Rallying Cry become Tier 5.
• Northwinds gains increased cooldown and no saving throw.
• Expeditious Retreat becomes Tier 5. (We want the commitment to Tier 5 here to be greatly rewarded. In the past we've probably erred too much on the side of front-loading desirable abilities.)
• Updated text on Song of Heroism to reflect that it gives +1 damage bonus to Inspire Courage.

[Cetus]

Because Varg stated that increased ranks in Spinning Ice, increases the amount of Bard levels towards the DC of the ability.....

In bold below...

Heh, Nicely done

[Dagolar]

My remark contained within it an assumption that fighters are supposed to be the better tacticians, that was their niche. No?

tl;dr version: Skip to the next colored point.

No.
In pen and paper, bards are ALWAYS the tactician class [at least as main core classes go- but lets not drag Marshal or the like into this], having the knowledge and social skills and control abilities to-
Oh, my apologies, you meant tactical feat class!

Clarity is important, you know!

Well, then it gets tricky. We'll have to ignore pen and paper as a basis, since nearly every class has pretty universal access to tactical prestige routes.. which, actually, seems to be where DDO is leaning now.. hey, remember when barbarians got a strength-based trip cleave? Or thief-acrobats got a dex-based one?

Okay, so, again, to make your argument work, we'd have to ignore p&p and look at in-game emphasis.

Certainly fighters in DDO have long been the masters of tactical DCs and tactical feat selections.

So what you're really asking is for the inclusion of a proper heroic tactical feat tree- rather than just waiting for Legendary Dreadnought, which seems to synergize best with fighters already.

Despite the presentation I've given, I don't actually disagree with that sentiment in any way.

As far as prestige classes go, fighters need the most love, by far [post-bard changes]: Stalwart suffers in comparison to Sacred, and Kensei, well, the only notably good things in Kensei are basically overpriced monk tree splashes.

Revamp Kensei, add more tactical elements, revamp Stalwart, make the higher tier core and T5 abilities actually remotely appealing.

No, that's a really good thing to promote.

But it's still more a topic of Fighters needing their turn at a prestige pass, rather than any issue whatsoever in any of the other class trees.

Or, as Vargouille put far more sweetly and succinctly:

We're willing to hear discussion why Fighters should be better at control than Bards or why a long cooldown AoE control attack doesn't fit in Warchanter, but let's be clear that's what the discussion is about.

It's worth noting that Skalds, the Warchanter base, were known for rushing into the enemies and overwhelming them with their ferocity.
A mass stunning attack doesn't seem out of place.

And fighters being better at control- using control in the most universal sense- than bards is ridiculous.
In pnp, only pure enchanter casters can compare to bards in terms of control [assuming use of control-based prestiges on both sides].

In terms of being able to manipulate the battlefield, even in the most minute way, again, bards were really more favored toward it than fighters in pen and paper [the only advantage fighters having had in pen and paper was the ability to utilize any [TACTICAL]-category feat for their bonus fighter feat slots].

That doesn't mean fighters shouldn't get more traditionally MMO style melee control attacks in DDO, it just means, keep in mind what you're asking for.

tl;dr version: Here's the important stuff:


In any case, if fighters do get more tactical focus, it shouldn't just be "ooh, look, aoe <X TACTICAL FEAT ABILITY>!!!111"
Lets give them something interesting. Give them a head-bash, that confuses the enemy to wander around for 5 seconds (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/confusion.htm). Give them a Spring-Attack-requiring tactical feat that lets them cut forward through enemies, pushing them aside.
Add an ability to fighters and acrobats both, that lets them make a single automatic attack when coming out of tumble [toggle].

The fact is, it's not a matter of power comparisons- D&D [3rd edition] has always allowed countless numerous multiple paths to similar playstyles.
Emphasize the versatility. Emphasize that, yes, as per pen and paper, there are tactical smites and tactical rage-charge attacks, and tactical x and y.
But emphasize that fighters have the versatility, the command of basic combat, that allows them to maneuver themselves better than most, to have access to more tactical combat abilities than most.

That's what I'd like to see, anyway.

[Scrabbler]

Revamp Kensei, add more tactical elements, revamp Stalwart, make the higher tier core and T5 abilities actually remotely appealing.

So when a few Bard melee trees come out that are accidentally more powerful than they should be, the solution is to edit all of the 16 existing melee trees to match up with the new power level. That's a whole lot of work for the developers!

[Rautis]

You can't really say which part of the ability increased ranks boost. The DC or the duration. Getting full bard levels to DC would be insanely strong. Even at half bard levels to DC the formula means that you can get DC equal to level 28 stunning fist once you hit level 20 if the stat bonus isn't considered. However it will not progress above that, just stay there. I think this kind of DC is fine.

Then comes the PDK cha to tactics ability which can result in rather funny numbers considering the DC stat also is charisma. This could be solved by changing the DC stat into something else. Going for STR would still result in higher possible DCs than stunning fist as STR goes a bit higher. Though this could also be a good opportunity to make some PDK sales. Not sure which is stronger. Bladeforged reconstruct or at maximum 10 extra DC to a CC ability.

[Dagolar]

So when a few Bard melee trees come out that are accidentally more powerful than they should be, the solution is to edit all of the 16 existing melee trees to match up with the new power level. That's a whole lot of work for the developers!

You seem to have not only misunderstood my points COMPLETELY, but shot off into space on a psychedelic kobold of confusion along the way.

I assume that was the scenario involved, anyway.

But to clarify would require you first removing any assumptions about that last post.
Done? Good.

From the baseline:

As far as prestige classes go, fighters need the most love, by far [post-bard changes]: Stalwart suffers in comparison to Sacred, and Kensei, well, the only notably good things in Kensei are basically overpriced monk tree splashes.

The comparison was to other similar trees [stalwart versus sacred] or to trees as a whole.
It had not a single thing to do with bards in any sense whatsoever.
I was noting that fighter trees were lacking. That's it. Done. Nothing else.

I then noted that if we wanted to add in more tactical emphasis, that could be done while revamping the trees.

For comparison, barbarians have great trees, but a lousy, outdated core class [unless you think 14/- DR with all PRE and ED enhancements taken is a viable comparison to the 30/epic/60/epic shadow plate, then we're just not going to be able to agree on the role of barbarians in end-game (which in my view would be high DR and MRR, but low PRR and AC and non-fort saves)].

Likewise, Kensei has a solid Core20 ability.
But the tree has no real flow, some fairly unappealing abilities spotted in, and what good monk-based abilities there are are just overpriced from actual monk trees, which, when added in to the ability to add in monk stances and bonuses from monk splashing, makes multi-classing probably a bit more preferable if you're focusing on the kensei tree.

Then Stalwart lacks T5 abilities that compare well to Sacred's- nevermind that Sacred as a whole seems to be a bit more firm.. and hey, for some reason paladins of all things get cheaper armor mastery than fighters. No, that seems legit- they bless the armor to be lighter, right? Magical herbal oils to rub it down? Boy I'm glad it didn't involve physical mastery of the armor, that's just twice as hard. Literally twice. Look, it says so right there, and there!

So in summation, nothing to do with bards. Just agreeing to the sentiment that fighters could use a go-over.